


',•< 
















, ^^ -'-» 



CAMPBELLISM EXAMINED 



BY 



JEREMIAH B. "^ JETER, 

M 

OF BIOHMOND, VIRGINIA. 




NEW YORK: 
SHELDON, LAMPOET, & BLAKEMAN, 

No. 115 NASSATJ STREET. 

BOSTON: GOULD & LINCOLN. 
1855. 



^nS 



Entered according to Act of Congress, iii the year 1854, by 

jere:miah b. jeter, 

In tme Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Soiither.\ 
District of :N'ew York. 



Ithe ubeaey 

IwAiHlWOTOwi 



7 

r 




TO THE 
ESTEEMED BRETHREN, 

AT WHOSE REQUEST, THIS WORK HAS BEEN PREPARED, 

IT IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED BY 

THEAUTHOR, 

WITH HIS EARNEST PRAYEE, TO THE 

"FATHER OF LIGHTS," 

JHAT IT MAY PROMOTE THE CAUSE OF TRUTH ANp PIETY- 



CONTENTS 



I. The Introduction, 7 

n. Oampbellism in its Inception, . . , 13 

III. Oampbellism in its Chaos, .... 23 

rV. Oampbellism in its Formation, . , . 76 

Y. Oampbellism in its Principles, . - .114 

YI. Oampbellism in its Discipline, . . . 292 

Vn. Oampbellism in its Tendencies, . . . 338 



VIII, Conclusion, 354 



^'REV. DR. J. B. JETER, 

Dear Sir : — 

The undersigned ministers and members of 
Baptist churches, have been deeply impressed with the impor- 
tance to our churches of a succinct and popular treatise upon 
the rise, progress, character, and influence of the sect of Chris- 
tians called Disciples, or Campbellites. The knowledge which 
your position has given you of this subject, and the clearness 
of thought, justness of view, candor of spirit, which have 
marked the passage on this subject contained in your memoir 
of the late Rev. Andrew Broaddus, have induced us respectfully 
to request that you will at your earliest convenience prepare a 
work of the character above described. 

The undersigned believe that by complying with this re- 
quest, you will do an essential service to the cause of truth, 
and advance the glory of our Holy Redeemer. 

Elisha Tucker,* Edward Lathrop, 

M. B, Anderson, Geo. W. Samson, 

Heman Lincoln, J. M. Linnard, 

0, W. Houghton, A. D. Gillette, 

S. S. Cutting, J. C. Stockbridge, 

W. B. Jacobs, S. F. Smith." 

* Since the above request was signed, in May, 1852, Doctor Tucker, of 
Chicago, Illinois, has been called from his labors to his reward. I knew, 
loved, and venerated him. He was a noble specimen of a Christian m» lis- 



VI MEMORIAL. 

ter. With enlarged views, ripe experience, sound judgment, and a consef- 
vative spirit, he was eminently fitted to be, as he was, a leader in " the sac- 
ramental host of God's elect." By his expansive and generous sympathies, 
he was allied to men of all parties, and all sections ; but by his devotion to 
truth, he was identified with the advocates of evangelic Christianity. His 
life was a beautiful commentary on the doctrine which he embraced, and 
his death a happy termination of a life of toil and usefulness. I need not 
say more of this excellent servant of Christ, and less in justice to my feel- 
ings, I could not say. J. B. J. 



INTRODUCTION 



The lerm Oamphellism is used in this treatise, 
not as a term of reproach, but of distinction. No 
other word denotes the system which it is proposed 
to examine. Mr. Alexander Campbell, of Bethany, 
Virginia, and the party embracing his views, hare 
assumed several appellations. They have styled 
themselves ^^ Reformers j' '' Christians,'' and " Dis- 
ciples'' Without discussing their exclusive claim 
to these titles, it is clear that from neither of them 
can any term be derived which will fairly distinguish 
their system of doctrine. The word Reformation 
has been appropriated, by common consent, to de- 
note that great moral revolution, of which Luther 
and Calvin were the prime agents. The term 
(P^lsttoajnoUj nan never be wrested from its univer- 



Vm INTKODUCTION. 

sally established import^ to express the views of any 
sect or party^ however good^ wise or great. From 
the word Disciple, indefinite as an appellative^ no 
term can be derived to signify the views of those who 
adopt the name. Mr. Campbell claims to have dis- 
covered the ^^ Ancient Gospel'' Without at this 
time conceding or denying the equity of his claim^ 
it may be observed that the inquiries now to be made 
have reference not to the Ancient Oospel, recorded 
in the writings of the evangelists and apostles^ but 
to the speculations of Mr. Campbell^ contained in 
his voluminous works^ concerning this gospel, and 
which have been received as true by the friends of 
the ^' Current Reformation!' To call these specu- 
lations the Ancient Gospel, would be a manifest mis- 
nomer. I am then under the necessity of employ- 
ing some indefinite term, a tedious circumlocution, 
or the word Camphellism to denote the system under 
discussion, and the last course seems preferable. 

This system is with great propriety termed Camp- 
hellism, Systems of philosophy, science, and reli- 
gion, have usually been designated after their dis- 
coverers, first promulgators, or most distinguished 
advocates. Mr. Campbell is the author, and most 
eminent proclaimer of the peculiar doctrines, which, 



INTRODUCTION. UC 

within the last thirty years^ have spread in the 
Southern and Western states^ under the title of 
'^ The Reformat ion f' No other man has added an 
article to the system, subtracted one from, it, or ma- 
terially modified it. Many truths are taught by 
Mr. Campbell in common with other Christians ; 
very few of the principles for which he pleads are 
strictly new ; but having revived, modified, and 
placed in new combinations some antiquated senti- 
ments, and added to them a few original specula- 
tions, he is fairly entitled to all the honor, and 
obnoxious to all the censure which his system 
merits. 

It is not my purpose to write a history of Oamp- 
bellism. I have neither the inclination^ time, nor 
means to do it. Nor do I design to confine myself 
to a polemic discussion. Campbellism, like other 
things earthly, has passed through various and im- 
portant changes. To arrive at just views of it, we 
must carefully notice its rise, progress, modifica- 
tions, and influence, as well as its distinctive princi- 
ples. It must be viewed from different stand- 
points, and under diff'erent phases, that its true 
character may be understood. My purpose is to 
furnish a faithful delineation of the system — its prin- 



X INTKCDUCTION. 

ciples^ spirit and influence — to censure the evil, and 
commend the good. 

Various considerations have prevailed with me to 
undertake this work. The subject to be examined 
is important. It were vain to deny that Campbell- 
ism has exercised an extensive influence on the reli- 
gious sentiment of the country. We are interested 
not less as philosophers than as Christians to in- 
quire into the causes of this success. The proposed 
treatise is demanded by public curiosity. What is 
Campbellism ? This question, asked by many, is 
not easily answered. Some perceive no distinction 
between it and the views generally entertained by 
the Baptists ; and others consider it a dangerous 
system of error. A calm, discriminating and faith-^^ 
f ul examination of it, cannot fail to profit both those 
who embrace, and those who reject it. All these 
considerations would probably have failed to induce 
me to undertake the work, had not brethren, whose 
judgment is worthy of respect, and with whose re- 
quest it is a pleasure to comply, urged me to en- 
gage in it. 

Of my fitness for the task the reader will judge 
by the manner of its execution. I have enjoyed 
very fair opportunities of forming correct opinions 



INTRODUCTION. XI 

of Mr. Campbeirs system. I first saw him in the 
year 1825. Since that time I have been a careful 
observer of his course. I have watched the gradual 
development of his principles^ and marked their in- 
fluence on the churches. I have read most that has 
been published by him and his opponents on the va- 
rious points in debate. I have conversed much with 
persons embracing and zealously supporting the Re- 
formation, 

It is my purpose to conduct this investigation in 
the spirit of candor and fairness^ knowing that noth- 
ing can be gained to the cause of truth and right- 
eousness by sophistry, misrepresentation and detrac- 
tion. No sentence incompatible with the claims of 
justice, and christian courtesy shall intentionally 
escape my pen ; nor shall I withhold a frank and 
faithful expression of my opinions on all points which 
I deem important. 

I do not hope to be able to meet the expectation, 
and satisfy the wishes of all my readers. Some will 
think me too lenient, and others too severe — some 
will think that I concede too much, and others too 
little. Truth generally lies between extremes. I 
am more anxious, I trust, to please Grod than men 
— to promote the cause of truth than to gain a vie- 



XU INTRODUCTION. 

toiy. Writing for no sect or party, but for all who 
desire to know the truth, I ask nothing of my read- 
ers, except an unprejudiced consideration of the 
facts and arguments presented in the work. The 
interests of the writer and reader are identical ; and 
the same law which requires him to publish, re- 
quires them to receive, the truth. 



CAMPBELLISM EXAlINEDe 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 

Circumstances^ it lias been frequently affirmed, 
make men. The remark is not true in an unquali- 
fied sense ; but it cannot be questioned that cir- 
cumstances exert a mighty influence in forming the 
tastes^ opinions^ and characters^ and guiding the 
lives of most men. Mr. Campbell, much as he has 
boasted of his independence of thought and con- 
duct, has not risen above this common law of 
humanity. He is, to a great extent, what his 
peculiar circumstances — ^his early training and asso- 
ciations, and his subsequent relations, avocations, 
and conflicts — have made him. He bears, most 
clearly, the impress of the mould in which he was 
cast. He was educated in the University of Glas- 
gow, in Scotland. If he was not brought up among 
the Seceders — as he probably was — he was early 
connected with that most rigid of all the Presby- 
terian sects, adopted their views, and fully imbibed 



14 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 

their spirit. ^^I have/' said he^ ^^ tried the phari- 
saic plan^ and the monastic. I was once so straight, 
that, like the Indian's tree, I leaned a little the 
other way. And however much I may be slandered 
now as seeking ' popularity/ or a popular course, I 
have to rejoice to my own satisfaction, as well as 
to others, I proved that truth, and not popularity 
was my object ; for I was once so strict a Separatist 
that I would neither pray nor sing praises with any 
one who was not as perfect as I supposed myself.'' 
Chn. Bap., p. 238. Had Mr. C. not passed his 
early years in Scotland, his religious views and 
career would have differed widely from what they 
have been. Many of his speculations have been 
Scottish importations. To which of the Seceder 
sects he was attached, does not appear, but it is 
presumed from his early phariseeism, to the strait- 
est. It would be strange, if his education in the 
school of bigotry and intolerance, had not given 
complexion to his spirit, character to his opinions, 
and direction to his labors, in after life. 

In August, 1809, this young Seceder, with a cer- 
tificate of church membership in his pocket, set 
sail from the city of Grreenock, in Scotland, for the 
United States, and, after a narrow escape from ship- 
wreck, landed safely in the city of New York, in 
the ensuing September. He brought with him the 
Reformation in embryo. Before he left the father- 
land, his faith ^^in creeds and confessions of human 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 15 

device^^ was considerably shaken. Whether the 
iron rigor of his creed^ by which he had been fet- 
teredj had any influence in unsettling his faith does 
not appear. From New York^ he immediately re- 
paired to Washington, Penn., and commenced his 
American career, with what he proclaimed as an 
important discovery, ^Hhat nothing not as old as 
the New Testament should be made an article of 
faith, a rule of practice, or a term of communion 
among Christians.'' This truth was the "^ pole- 
star'' to guide him in all subsequent researches and 
labors. We cannot but congratulate him on his 
discovery, while we confess our surprise that he 
should have been so long in making it. It was the 
doctrine — the main pillar of the great reformation 
led on by Luther, Calvin, and other worthies, in the 
sixteenth century. It had never been called in 
question by any respectable Protestant sect, or even 
writer, The most zealous advocates of human 
creeds ascribed to them no authority, except what 
they derived from the Scriptures. They might, by 
a misinterpretation of the Scriptures, put unscrip- 
tural articles into their creeds, or they might 
pervert the Scriptures to make them harmonize 
with their inherited creeds ; but not a creed-monger 
could be found who maintained, or even dreamed, 
that any thing ^^ not as old as the New Testament 
should be made an article of faith." 

Guided by this ^^ pole-star," Mr. 0. soon began 



16 CA.MPBiy:.LISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 

to make progress in religious knowledge. His 
^^ ]Dole-star'' proved to be ^^ the morning star of the 
reformation.'' In July^ 1810^ he publicly avowed 
his '^ convictions of the independency of the church 
of Christy and the excellency and authority of the 
Scriptures.'' He now commenced a series of desul- 
tory^ itinerating labor — '^ pronouncing/' to use his 
own style^ '^ orations on the primary topics of the 
Christian religion/' in Western Pennsylvania^ and 
the contiguous parts of Yirginia and Ohio. In 
1811^ he married^ and became a resident^ and, as 
soon as the laws would permit^ a citizen of Virginia. 
About this time^ he was led to question the divine 
authority of infant sprinkling ; and, after a long, 
serious, and prayerful examination of all the sources 
of information within his reach, to reject it, and to 
solicit immersion on a profession of faith. He was 
baptized by Elder Matthias Luse, in the presence of 
Elder Henry Spears, in June, 1812, and soon after 
was ordained one of the Elders of the church at 
Brush Kun. He did not, at first, design to connect 
himself with the Baptist denomination, but forming 
a better acquaintance with some of the members of 
the Bedstone Baptist Association, composed of 
churches partly in Pennsylvania, and partly in Vir- 
ginia, he induced the church with which he was 
connected, to sue for admission into that body, and 
presenting a written declaration of their faith, they 
were received in the fall of 1813. From this period, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 17 

until 1823;, Mr. C. continued his labors as a Christian 
teacher^ in North- Western Virginia^ without any- 
very important results. But his mind was far from 
being stationary. Light dawned on it apace. He 
was preparing, either with or without design, to 
become the advocate of what he deemed a great 
reformation, and the Corypheus of a large party. 
Chn. Bap., p. 92. 

Mr. Campbell, having burst the bonds imposed 
on him by his early creed, pursued his religious in- 
vestigations, without restraint, except such as was 
laid on him by natural temperament, early im- 
pressions, and mental capacity. He had now ceased 
to be a pharisee. He could sing and pray with his 
fellow-Christians. But mingling with them, he 
soon began to speculate on their manifold errors. 
His penetrating eye perceived, or he thought that 
it perceived, and he did not lack moral courage to 
proclaim, that '^ the present popular exhibition of 
the Christian religion is a compound of Judaism, 
heathen philosophy, and Christianity.'' Chn. Bap., 
p. 9. The phrase '^ popular exhibition of the Chris- 
tian religion'' is somewhat equivocal ; and yet there 
can be no reasonable doubt as to the sense in which 
he uses it. It could be nothing to his purpose to 
affirm that the exhibitions of Christianity made by 
Komanists, Grerman Eationalists, or the advocates 
of baptismal regeneration, are such a compound. 
Among these classes of religionists he was not 



18 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 

laboring. He^ doubtless, referred to tbe exhibition 
of Christianity usually made by the prevailing re- 
ligious denominations of the country. These dif- 
ferent Christian persuasions, mostly maintaining, 
along with some errors, almost inseparable from 
human imperfection, the vital, soul-saving truths 
of the Grospel, were in his estimation, exhibitors of 
a compound of ^^ Judaism, heathen philosophy and 
Christianity.'' 

That there may be no mistake on this subject^ 
another quotation from, the pen of Mr. C. will be 
furnished. 

^^If Christians were, and may be the happiest 
people that ever lived, it is because they live under 
the most gracious institution ever bestowed on men. 
The meaning of this institution has been buried 
under the rubbish of human traditions for hundreds 
of years. It was lost in the dark ages, and has 
never been, till recently, disinterred. Various efforts 
have been made, and considerable progress attended 
them ; but since the Grand Apostacy was com- 
pleted, till the present generation, the Gospel of 
Jesus Christ has not been laid open to mankind in 
its original plainness, simplicity and majesty. A 
veil in reading the New Institution has been on the 
hearts of Christians,'' &c. Chn. Sys., p. 180. 

With the truth or falsehood of these opinions, we 
have, at present, no concern. It is, however, de- 
sirable to take an accurate observation of Mr. Camp* 



CAMPBELUSM IN ITS INCEPTION. 19 

beirs position. The above language defines, quite 
nnambiguously^ bis own conceptions of tbe ground 
which he occupied. The Christian institution — the 
Gospel of salvation — had been buried, under a mass 
of traditions, for ages. Various efforts had been 
made, at different times, by men of great reputation 
for learning, piety, zeal, and fidelity, to remove the 
superincumbent mass, with small success. Then 
the Keformer of Bethany arose, dug away the rub- 
bish, and exposed, in the light of day, the long lost 
Gospel, in all its beauty, simphcity and majesty. 
These are, certainly, high pretensions. They may 
be just, and if so, we should know it, that we may 
render homage to our benefactor. We propose in 
the progress of this work, to make strict inquiries 
concerning the justice of these claims. 

Mr. C. was now prepared to enter earnestly on 
the prosecution of his mission. Having analyzed 
the '' popular exhibition of the Christian religion,'^ 
and pointed out its primary elements, and having 
made considerable progress in disinterring the 
" ancient Gospel'' from the deep grave in which 
for centuries it had lain, he was naturally desirous 
that the benefits of his discoveries and labors 
should not be confined to an obscure corner of 
Virginia. The candle was not lighted to be put 
under a bushel. The morning star of the new 
Reformation must shed its effulgence in a wider 
sphere. That he might have a channel for dissemi- 



20 CAMPBELLISM m ITS INCEPTION. 

natinghis newly formed opinions^, Mr. C. commenced 
publishing a small monthly pamphlet, entitled the 
Christian Baptist. The first No. was issued from 
Buffalo, afterwards called Bethany, Brooke County, 
Va., July 4th, 1823. The day was aptly chosen 
for the commencement of the enterprise. Conse- 
crated to the celebration of American Independence, 
it was thenceforth to be distinguished as the com- 
mencement of a struggle for the liberation of the 
churches from priestly domination. The publica- 
tion of the Christian Baptist marks an era in the 
history of Camjibellism. For seven years it was the 
repository of the lucubrations of Mr. C, and of his 
numerous correspondents, who rapidly sprang up 
through the country. It was edited with ability. 
As it will hereafter be necessary to examine many arti- 
cles in this work, it is sufficient now merely to express 
the opinion that it contains some things worthy of 
commendation, more that are entitled to no parti- 
cular notice, and a great mass of rubbish. Mr. C. 
has boasted much of the independent, generous, and 
fearless manner in which his periodicals have been 
conducted. He has professed to publish both sides 
of every controversy. It may be remarked, that policy 
frequently assumes the garb of liberality. He was 
a skillful and popular debater — handled a ready 
pen — was desirous to gain notoriety^ and promote 
the circulation of his paper — and controversy was 
the pabulum on which he lived and thrived. It is 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION, 21 

easy to perceive that under sucla circumstances, 
sound policy as well as liberality^ would court dis- 
cussion. Liberality is envinced^ not by an eager- 
ness for disputation, but by a candid, fair, and 
considerate treatment of our opponent. Few theo- 
logians were qualified to enter the lists with a 
disputant so ready, adroit and sarcastic as he was, 
and most of that small number, feeling but little 
interest in his labors or speculations, deemed it 
sound policy, if not liberality, to decline gratifying 
his penchant for debate. 

It does not apjDcar to have been the purpose of 
Mr. C, at least in the commencement of his Eeforma- 
tion, to organize a new sect. That his labors tended 
to that result was clear to every discerning, atten- 
tive, and impartial observer. Sectarianism was the 
object of the most intense aversion- — an aversion 
probably heightened by the remembrance of his 
previous Seceder intolerance. His favorite project 
was to fuse the various Christian sects, not, it would 
seem, by the fire of love, but of criticism and ridi- 
cule, and from the melted mass mould, in what he 
termed, the '^ ancient Gospel,'' a new and glorious 
body. Let us hear him on this point. 

" I have no idea of adding to the catalogue of new 
sects. This game has been played too long. I labor 
to see sectarianism abolished, and all Christians of 
every name united upon the one foundation on 
which the Apostolic Church was founded. To 



22 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 

bring Baptists and Paedo-baptists to this, is my 
supreme end/' Chn. Bap., p. 217. 

No intelligent Christian can object to the end 
which Mr. 0. proposed to accomplish. The union 
of all true Christians on the Apostolic foundation, 
is an object most devoutly to be wished. AH good 
men pray for it. But we must carefully inquire, 
whether the means by which he proposes to attain 
this object, are Scriptural and efficacious. We are 
now prepared to contemplate Campbellism under 
another phase, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

The period of Campbellism which it is now pro- 
posed to examine^ extends from the first appear- 
ance of the Christian Baptist to the time when Mr. 
Campbell^ and those persons who adopted his pe- 
culiar views^ and entered into his spirit and aims, 
were excluded from the Baptist denomination. 
This period may with equal propriety be termed 
its chaotic or its helligerent state. Belligerent it cer- 
tainly was. The publication of the Christian Bap- 
tist was an open, formal declaration of war against 
all the religious sects and parties in the country ; 
and most fearlessly, skillfully and furiously was it 
waged. Criticism, logic, eloquence, sarcasm, ridi- 
cule, and especially caricature and sophistry were 
the missiles employed in this warfare. Kevelation, 
history, and fiction were laid under contribution in 
the conflict. At first, Mr. C. stood alone, battling 
single handed, as he fancied, against the disciplined 
hosts of sectarianism ; but soon he was joined by 
a band of volunteers, less learned, strategic, and 
cautious, but by no means less valorous, confident 



24 CAMPBELLIS>r IN ITS CHAOS. 

and aggressive^ than himself. Almost all who came 
over to his side were from the first warriors, of 
dauntless spirit j panoplied from head to foot. So 
great was their ardor, and so fierce their onslaught, 
that, for a time, it seemed as if one could ^^ chase a 
thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight.'' 

This was no less the chaotic than the belligerent 
period of Campbellism. It would have puzzled the 
most careful, discriminating and candid reader of 
the Christian Baptist to form any clear conceptions 
of Mr. Campbeirs principles or aims. He eschewed 
all the common and well defined terms of theology. 
His teaching was almost entirely negative. He was 
neither a Unitarian nor a Trinitarian, neither a 
Calvinist nor an Arminian ; but what he really was, 
or desired to be, none could certainly affirm. It 
was clear that he rejected ^^ the popular exhibition 
of the Christian religion ;'' but not clear what he 
would substitute for it. Many opinions and prac- 
tices held sacred and dear by most Christians, were 
by him openly and sarcastically denounced ; but 
his own views were concealed, or cautiously and ob- 
scurely revealed. The title of his monthly periodi- 
cal — '^ The Christian Baptist'' — might seem to 
identify him with the Baptist denomination ; but 
the appearance was illusory. Agreeing with the 
Baptists on the action and subjects of baptism, he 
differed widely from them on the design of the ordi- 
nance, and on many other doctrinal, experimental 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 25 

and practical subjects ; and in the sequel they re- 
ceived a full share of his censure and opposition. 
True^ he constantly and earnestly insisted that the 
Scriptures are the only and sufficient rule of faith 
and practice^ but in this opinion there was nothing 
distinctive. He held it in common, not only with 
the evangelical Protestant sects, but with Unita- 
rians, Universalists, and almost every class of reli- 
gious fanatics and errorists. 

Mr. Campbell aspired to the honor of being a 
Reformer. The changes which he wrought in some 
of the churches are styled by him and his admirers 
the Reformation, That a reformation was needed 
by the Christian sects of that time none, who pos- 
sess a tolerable acquaintance with their condition, 
and the claims of the Gospel, will deny. Indeed, 
what church, or member of a church, does not, in 
some respects, and in some degree, need reforma- 
tion ? There was needed then, as at all times, an 
increase of religious knowledge in the churches, 
but, more than this, an increase of piety. The 
reformation demanded by the times was in spirit 
and practice, rather than doctrine. They were 
then, as now, far too worldly, formal and ineffi- 
cient. Among the Baptist churches there were some 
sad evils. In parts of the country, the churches 
were infected with an antinomian spirit, and blight- 
ed by a heartless, speculative, hair-splitting ortho- 
doxy. These churches were inostlv penurious, op- 
2 



2o CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS, 

posed to Christian missions, and all enlarged plans 
and self-denying efforts, for promoting the cause of 
Christ. In general, the careful study of the Scrip- 
tures, the religious education of children, the 23ro- 
per observance of the Lord's day, a -wholesome^ 
scriptural discipline, the reasonable support of pas- 
tors, and, in fine, devotion to the Eedeemer's cause, 
were too much neglected. The pious and intelli- 
gent fathers, before Mr. C. was heard of, saw, con- 
fessed and lamented these evils ; and sought, in a 
kind and faithful manner, to correct them. But 
they are not of easy correction. Having their root 
in habit, or established opinions, or, worse still, in 
depravity, they can be eradicated only by the divine 
blessing on judicious and faitliful efforts. Had he 
labored, with discrimination, fairness and fidelity 
for the correction of these, and similar evils, even 
if his zeal had not always been tempered with dis- 
cretion, nor his courage with moderation, he would 
not have incurred the displeasure, or provoked the 
opposition of the intelligent and candid in the Bap- 
tist denomination. He attacked some of these 
evils with ability, but in a spirit and manner far 
better adapted to irritate than to convince ; and 
even those who were reformed by his arguments, 
lost as much in spirit as they gained in knowledge, 
and became fiery disputants rather than meek and 
lowly Christians. But his plans of Eeformation 
were, by no means, limited to the evils which have 



CAMPBELLISM IK ITS CHAOS. 27 

been specified. His views on the subject were radi- 
cal. He seemed to be commissioned to ^^ pluck iip^ 
to pull down^ and to destroy.'' Scarcely anything 
believed or practiced among Christians met his ap- 
probation. He gave himself up to the compara- 
tively easy, and not very profitable task^ of fault- 
finding. But to indulge no longer in general re- 
marks, it is proper to descend to particulars. 

The object of Mr. Campbell's first and most viru- 
lent attack was, what he styled, the ^^ Kingdom of 
the Clergy.'' The term clergy is not found in our 
English version of the Scriptures. It was at the 
beginning of this Keformation, as at present, used, 
and well understood, to mean ministers of the gos- 
pel — men whose office it is to give religious instruc- 
tion and conduct religious worship. It was rarely 
found in the reports of ecclesiastical bodies, but was 
commonly employed by secular writers to denote the 
pastors and teachers in every Christian communion. 
The clergy of this country were a numerous class, 
invested in different Christian communions with 
very different degrees of authority ; but in all exer- 
cising only such as was cheerfully accorded to them 
by the people among whom they labored. Entirely 
destitute of civil power, they had no means of main- 
taining their spiritual authority but the sanctity of 
their lives, the usefulness of their labors, the weight 
of their arguments, and the consent of their flocks. 
They were an important class ; and they derived 



28 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

their importance from their official station^ their va* 
rions toils, and their extended religious influence. 
They were by no means faultless. Some of them 
were ignorant, conceited and vain ; others were 
proud, haughty and imperious ; others still, were 
hypocritical, mercenary and base ; and not a few 
were worldly, selfish, and sycophantic. Against 
these evils, no vigilance or fidelity on the part of 
the churches, or their rulers, could perfectly provide. 
Among the twelve apostles, one was a devil. But 
as a body, the clergy of the evangelical denomina- 
tions were intelligent, pious, self-denying, diligent, 
and faithful in their vocation. Among them were 
many men of shining abilities, and most exemplary de- 
votion to the cause of Christ — the excellent of the 
earth. Considering their talents, and their position 
in society, no class of the community was so meageiiy 
rewarded for their toils and sacrifices. Many labored 
for nothing, but the pleasure of doing good — a 
larger number, perhaps, for a bare support— and 
very few were able, after maintaining themselves 
and their families, to lay by a surplus from their 
salaries for a season of affliction or infirmity. 
These statements will scarcely be called in question 
by any person having information on this subject, 
and possessing common candor. To discriminating 
and just censures of the clergy, no reasonable objec- 
tion can be ofi*ered. Their official rank should not 
shield them from merited reproach, but, rather, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS, 29 

subject their conduct to a more rigid scrutiny, and 
their sins to a severer condemnation. But every 
friend of religion, morality and good order, must re- 
volt at seeing them rudely attacked, ridiculed, tra- 
duced, and held up to the scorn of the infidel and 
blasphemer. In all time, they have been subject to 
the reproach and scoffing of sceptics and opposers 
of the Gospel ; but it was surely strange that a 
Christian minister should vie with these, or even 
exceed them, in their congenial work. 

Mr. Campbeirs first aim was to overthrow the 
power and influence of the popular clergy. 

'"' To see Christians,'' he wrote, ^^ enjoy their 
privileges, and to see sinners brought from darkness 
to light, are the two great objects for which we de- 
sire to live, to labor, and to suffer reproach.'' This 
was very w^ell. But by what means did he propose 
to secure these important objects ? He shall an- 
swer. ^^ In endeavoring to use our feeble efforts 
for these glorious objects, we have found it necessary, 
among other things, to attempt to dethrone the reign- 
ing popular clergy from their high and lofty seats, 
which they have for ages been building for them- 
selves In opposing and exposing them, and 

their kingdom, it is not to join the infidel cry against 
priest or priestcraft ;" (certainly not !) '^it is not 
to gratify the avaricious or the licentious ; but it is 
to pull down their Babel, and to emancipate those 
whom they have enslaved, to free the people from 



30 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

their imrighteous dominion and unmerciful spolia- 
tion/^ Chn. Bap., 32. 

The clergy were informed, no little to their sur- 
prise, that their order had its origin, not merely in 
the perversion of Christianity, but in the specula- 
tions of the most ancient pagan philosophers. Lis- 
ten to his words. 

^^ Little do many think, and indeed little do they 
know, that the modern clergy are indebted to Py- 
thagoras, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Zeno, Epicu- 
rus, a.nd a thousand pagan philosophers, Jewish 
and Christian theorists, for the order of things 
which they found ready to their hand, as soon as they 
put on the sacerdotal robes.'' Chn. Bap., 54. 

It would be easy to fill a volume with quotations 
resembling the above, but it is unnecessary — these 
may serve as specimens. Mr. C. employed all the 
resources of his various learning and fertile genius 
to subvert the influence of the clergy, and bring 
them into popular contempt. They were stigma- 
tized as '^ textuaries,'' ^^ scrap-doctors,'' '' theoretic 
doctors," '^ populars," ^^ priests," '^hirelings," and 
'^ goat-milkers." The Third Epistle of Peter is an 
ingeniously written burlesque of the clergy, with 
just truth enough to make it plausible and biting, 
and divert attention from its «:ross exa2:2:eration. and 
merciless injustice. Chn. Bap. 166. They were, 
in Mf; Campbell's estimation, a set of mercenary 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 31 

hirelings^ actuated in their labors by no better 
motive than the love of lucre. 

'^ They have/' said he^ ^^ shut up every body's 
mouth but their own ; and theirs they will not open 
unless they are paid for it/' '^ A hireling is one 
who prepares himself for the office of a ^ preacher/ 
or ^minister/ as a mecha^nic learns a trade^ and who 
obtains a license from a congregation^ convention^ 
presbytery^ pope^ or diocesan bishop^ as a preacher 
or minister, and agrees by the day or sermon, month 
or year, for a stipulated reward/' 

According to this definition, the man who from 
love to Christ and souls, prepares himself, by the 
most earnest, attentive and prayerful study of the 
Scriptures, for the Christian ministry, and receives 
for his ministerial toils a stipulated reward, even 
though that reward may be far less than he could 
receive in some respectable, secular avocation, is a 
hireling. Lest, however, a suspicion should arise 
that Mr. Campbell's teaching on this subject has 
been misunderstood, we must have another quota- 
tion from his pen. 

^^ Upon the whole, I do not think we will err very 
much in making it a general rule, that every man 
who receives money for preaching the Gospel, or for 
sermons, by the day, month, or year, is a hireling in 
the language of truth and soberness." — Chn. Bap., 
71, 233. 

It is due to Mr. C. to remark, that he admitted 



32 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

that there were some good men among the clergy — 
a fev/^ who differing from their class^ were pure in 
spite of the corrupting influence of their office. It 
is proper, also, to state that in the commencement 
of his editorial labors, he specially excepted the 
^^ Elders or Deacons of a Christian Assembly/' from 
all his censures of the ^^ Christian Clergy/' Chn. 
Bap.j 8. Who these " Elders and Deacons'' were, 
it is not easy to determine. At that time Mr. C. 
was connected with the Baptist denomination, and 
very few, if any congregations, had embraced his 
peculiar views. It probably had reference to the 
ojBficers of Baptist churches bearing these titles ; it 
was not long, however, before he discovered that 
there were clergy in these churches as well as in 
others. He writes — 

'' There is one spirit in all the clergy, whether 
they be Eomanist or Protestant, Baptist or Pgedo- 
baptist, learned or unlearned, their own workmanship, 
or the workmanship of others." Chn. Bap., 94. 

It is fair to permit Mr. C. to define what he means 
by a Baptist clergyman. '' I have known, he writes, 
'^ a young Baptist priest made and finished in Phil- 
adelphia, go to the State of New York, preach a 
few times to a rich congregation, give in his letter, 
and in two or three weeks be called out from amon^ 
the brethren to become their bishoT) ; and that, too, 
before he has got a wife, or a house, or a family to rule 
v/ell. Such teachers I must rank among the clergy, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 33 

and, indeed, they soon prove themselves to have a 
full portion, and sometimes a double portion of the 
spirit of the priesthood/' Chn. Bap., 94. 

It is not quite clear what constituted the claim 
of this '"^ young priest''' to rank among the clergy. 
Was it the fact that he was educated in Philadel- 
phia — that he became the bishop of a wealthy con- 
gregation — or th?ut he had not ^" got a wife'' — or 
was it all these circumstances combined, that made 
him one of the clergy ? The Baptists, neither in 
Philadelphia, nor elsewhere, deemed any man, either 
j^oung or old, fit to take upon himself the sacred 
office of bishop, without furnishing evidence of sin- 
cere piety, and a desire to enter on the episcopal 
work, and possessing suitable qualifications for the 
service. They might entertain, as doubtless in 
many cases they did, defective views of episcopal 
qualifications, and they might be deceived in the 
motives of candidates for the office, but in no in- 
stance did they knowingly induct any man into the 
office without judging him to be holy, of good re- 
port, and possessed of gifts for performing its func-- 
tions. The truth is, the term " clergy y' in Mr. 
Campbell's vocabulary, denoted all ministers of 
every Christian denomination, who did not adopt his 
peculiar view^s, enter into the spirit of his Eeforma- 
tion, and co-operate with him in the accomplish- 
ment of his plans. 

Simultaneously with Mr. Campbell's attack on the 



34 cai.ipbellib:vI in its chaos. 

clergy^ lie denounced all Creeds or Confessions of 
Faith, as the fruitful source of discord, schism, and 
mischief. The term ^" Creed,'' in its ecclesiastic 
sense, denotes a summary of Christian doctrine. 
There is in Christendom a great variety of creeds, 
from the so-called Apostle's Creed down to the 
Christian System, composed by Mr. Campbell, as 
an exhibition of the principles of his Keformation. 
Some are in the main sound, and some are unsound ; 
some are evangelical, and some are anti-evangelical ; 
the worst contain some truth, and the best, perhaps, 
some error. Of the lawfulness of writing a creed 
there can be no reasonable doubt. Every intelligent 
Christian has a creed, written or unv/ritten. There 
are certain facts, truths and principles, which he 
believes and maintains, and the belief of which he 
deems essential to the existence of true holiness. 
He may, or may not write these articles of his be- 
lief, but they are equally his creed ; and equally 
efficacious in controlling his conduct, whether they 
be written or unwritten. The writing of them is 
merely placing in a visible form what previously 
existed in his mind ; and doing so contravenes no 
law of Christ, and violates no moral obli«:ation. 
But what is here affirmed of an individual, may, 
with equal clearness and propriety, be affirmed of a 
church of Christ. They have, and of necessity must 
have, a creed — it may be latitudinous or rigid, may 
comprehend many articles or few, may be written or 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 35 

traditional — and this creed is their bond of union. 
This remark is as true of the churches organized by 
Mr. Campbell^ as of any churches in Christendom. 
They profess^ indeed, to make the Bible their creed 
— but to say nothing of the fact that they make this 
profession in common with all Christian denomina- 
tions, and with Mormons — there is a grand fallacy in 
it. It is not the Scriptures objectively, but subject- 
ively considered — in other w^ords, not the Scriptures 
as they exist in the original languages, but the Scrip- 
tures as they are understood, interpreted, and main- 
tained by themselves — that form the basis of their 
union. There are certain points of Scripture doc- 
trine in which they agree, and by wdiich they are 
identified. These may be few, and may seem to 
them to be unequivocally contained in the Bible — 
but the belief of these is indispensable to admission 
into their fellowship. They do, it is true, insist 
that their members shall speak of Bible things in 
Bible terms. To restore a pure, or Scriptural 
speech, is one of the main objects of the Eeforma- 
tion for which Mr. C. pleads. But in their boasted 
purity of speech, there lurks another great fallacy. 
They do not use Bible terms. The Bible, with a 
few slight exceptions, was written in the Hebrew and 
Greek tongues ; and they derive their theological 
terms from a translation of the Bible made by falli- 
ble men. Besides^^Bible terms are of no significance 
or value but as they are understood ; and they may 



36 CAMPBELLISM IX ITS CHAOS. 

serve the purposes of ignorance, error^ or hypocrisy, 
as well as of knowledge. In iine^ if men are united 
by the adoption of certain termSj or phrases, even 
though these may be Scriptural, apart from the 
meaning attached to them, they are influenced by 
sound rather than sense — ^by form rather than sub- 
stance — by appearance rather tlian truth. 

Creeds, like everything else, human and divine, 
that comes within mortal reach, may be used for 
good or evil purposes. To prevent or correct misre- 
presentations, to promote unity of faith, and to 
secure the instruction of church members, and their 
children, in the most important principles and 
duties of the Christian system, are considerations 
which, in the view of the intelligent and candid, 
justify the drawing up and printing of a creed. 
There are certain principles — such as the existence 
of God — the inspiration of the Scriptures — the re- 
surrection of Christ, &c. — the belief and admission 
of which are deemed by every church, indispensable 
to fellowship ; and it may be vvise and necessary for a 
church in some cases, to avow and proclaim them. 
When the Brush Eun church, of which Mr. Campbell 
was a member, sought to gain fellowship with the 
Eedstone Association, they presented '^ a written de- 
claration of their belief,'' drawn up, no doubt, by the 
Keformer himself. Chn. Bap., p. 92. And why was 
this creed presented but for the purpose of satisfy- 
ing the Redstone Association that the Brush Run 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 37 

church was worthy of Christian fellowship ? And 
if it was lawful for this church to publish her ^^de- 
claration of belief/*' to prove her title to fellowship^ 
it must have been equally lawful for the Bedstone 
Association, or any Christian church, to publish her 
'' declara^tion of belief/' to show whom she thought 
worthy of fellowship. Indeed^ the Bedstone Asso- 
ciation in receiving the Brush Bun church into her 
fellowship, on her '^ written declaration of belief,'' 
did^ in the most solemn and authoritative manner, 
adopt and avow that declaration as her creed. That 
creeds have sometimes been employed for unlawful 
and mischievous purposes, no one acquainted with 
ecclesiastical history can question. They have too 
frequently been used as a substitute for the Scrip- 
tures, to embalm error, and to bind the consciences 
of men, and have, in many instances, engendered a 
spirit of speculation, strife, and persecution, and 
led to the most painful schisms. 

Whether it is expedient for all churches, under 
all circumstances, to publish a creed, is a question 
which it is not proposed to discuss. My opinion is 
that it is not. Churches have flourished without a 
written creed — and by this is meant, that they have 
adhered to divine truth, abounded in the fruits of 
righteousness, and have, in a good degree, secured 
the ends of their organization. On the other hand, 
churches, having sound, evangelical creeds, have^ 



38 CA.MPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

in many instances^ sunk into formality^ error and 
corruption. 

Mr. C. was not alone in his opposition to creeds. 
Many good and wise men doubted tlieir expediency, 
and others were convinced that, on the whole, they 
were of mischievous tendency. A majority of the 
Baptist churches in the United States, had no writ- 
ten creed at all, and the few that did have, had only 
a very brief summary of doctrine, practically of 
no moment. But Mr. C. was from temperament 
or habit essentially an ultraist. His onslaught 
on creeds was fierce, and indiscriminate. It was 
the boasted peculiarity of his Eeformation that 
it was hostile to all creeds, heterodox or ortho- 
dox, bad or good. ^^ So far as this controversy re- 
sembles them,'' (he says, referring to other contro- 
versies concerning creeds,) ^^ in its opposition to 
creeds, it is to be distinguished from them in this 
all-essential attribute, viz. : — that our opposition to 
creeds arose from a conviction that ivhether the 
opinions in them were true or false, they luere hos- 
tile to the union^ peace^ harmony^ p)iirityj and joy 
of Christians ; and adverse to the conversion of 
the icorld to Jesus Christ.'' Chn. Sys., 9. How 
opinions in harmony with the Bible, embracing 
fundamental, soul-saving truths, lucidly, concisely, 
and systematically expressed — should produce such 
direful effects, it would puzzle an ordinary man to 
conceive ; but so Mr. C. believed and maintained. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 39 

And I must^ too, do liim the justice to state, that 
his course was in perfect harmony with this convic- 
tion. All creeds, Eomanist and Protestant, Calvin- 
istic and Arminian, rationalistic and evangelical, 
voluminous confessions of faith, and concise sum- 
maries of doctrine, came in for an equal share of his 
denunciations. If there was any difference, the 
Westminster Confession of Faith, (Presbyterian,) 
and the Philadelphia Confession of Faith, (Baptist,) 
received the largest measure of his censure. All 
churches having creeds were, according to his views, 
involved in the same condemnation and corruption. 
The purity, the wisdom, the intrinsic excellence of 
their creed, could not preserve them from a blight. 
That I may do no injustice, and save myself from 
the suspicion of exaggeration, I will quote his own 
language. ^^ The worshipping establishments now 
in operation throughout Christendom, increased and 
cemented by their respective voluminous confessions 
of faith, and their ecclesiastical constitutions, are not 
churches of Jesus Christy hut the legitimate daugh- 
ters of that onother of harlots^ the Church of Rome,'' 
Mill. Har., vol. 3, 362. '' What of the apostacy— do 
you place all the sects in the apostacy ? Yes ; all 
religious sects who have any human bond of union ; 
all who rally under any articles of confederation*' — 
that is, summary of doctrine, however Scriptural, 
clear, and important — '' other than the Apostle's 
doctrine'' — that is, according to the Bethany voca- 



40 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

bulary^ the whole volume of revelation — " and who 
refuse to yield all homage to the ancient order of 
things'' — that is^ the long-lost Gospel, disinterred 
by Mr. Campbell. Mill. Har., vol. 3, 362. From 
these quotations, it appears, that according to the 
" ancient Gospel/' as understood at Bethany, any 
body claiming to be Christian, adopting a summary 
of doctrine, as fundamental articles of belief, though 
the articles be true, and the belief of them indispen- 
sable to spJvation, is no church of Christ — but a 
sect — a harlot — and the da;Ughter of a harlot. 

The writer is reminded of a discourse, which, not 
long since, he heard Mr. C. deliver — a discourse 
whose doctrine was in striking harmony with the 
above erxtracts. His text was, Eph. iv. 4-6. His 
theme was chiefly the unity of the body of Christ. 
The church, he insisted, was a tody — not a mass, 
but an organized, symmetrical, and beautiful body. 
But Christ has only one body — a head with seven 
bodies would be a monster. But if Christ has only 
one body, v^hat body is it ? Not the Koman 
Catholic body — not the Episcopalian — not the Pres- 
byterian — not the Lutheran — not the Methodist — 
not the Baptist. He did not inform us, however, 
what body is the body of Christ. He trusted in the 
intelligence and candor of his hearers to infer that 
the body of Christ is the body that embraces the 
"'^ancient Gospel," and that has restored the '^an- 
cient order of things." The sermon vv^as eloquent, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS, 41 

plausible^ and sophistical. If a head with seven 
bodies is a monster^ a head without a body is useless. 
It is natural to inquire^ If the party adopting the 
peculiar views of Mr. C.^ is really the body of Christ, 
where was his body before the light shone from 
Bethany, and while all the sects were in the smoke 
and bondage of Babylon ? 

All this sophistry vanishes before Scriptural defi- 
nitions of the term cliurcli. It is used in two dis- 
tinct senses in the Nev/ Testament. In some places 
it means an organized, visible body of believers, 
assembling in one place for the worship of Christ. 
In this sense of the term, we read of the '' church 
of God which is at^ Corinth/' '^ the churches of 
Galatia/' "^ the churches of Judea/' &c. The Apos- 
tolic chuTcIies were all built on the same founda- 
tion, governed by the same laws, animated by the 
same spirit, and all co-operated in the same good 
cause ; but they did not constitute one great^ organ- 
{zed hierarchy. If ^'the church/' in this sense of 
the term, was the body of Christ, then he had more 
than one body — he had seven bodies in Asia, and 
we know not how many in Judea, Galatia, and other 
regions. In a few places the word church signifies 
the whole body of believers in Christ. This is the 
church for which he gave himself, Eph. v. 25. This 
is the body of which he is the head, Eph. i. 22, 23. 
To this body belong all in whom dwells the Para^ 
cletCj whatever their name, or visible connections. 



42 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

may be. Of this body^ the true Christians^ admit- 
ted by Mr. C. to be found among the sects, are liv- 
ing members. The churches of the Reformation do 
not constitute this body, but the pious among them 
are components of it. Now, the sophism of Mr. C. 
consisted in substituting the former for the latter 
sense of the term church in his text — a sense which 
it does not fairly admit. 

When Mr. Campbell commenced his Eeformation, 
he found various benevolent or religious associations 
in existence, having for their object the diffusion 
of Divine truth, and the extension of the kingdom 
of the Messiah. Among these institutions we may 
mention Mission, Bible, Tract, and Education So- 
cieties, and Sunday Schools, whose titles indicate, 
with sufficient precision, to the common reader, 
their respective spheres of operation. The objects 
contemplated by these associations were of the high- 
est importance, and appealed most powerfully to 
the sympathies and liberality of the pious. It were 
uncandid to deny that they originated with Vvdse 
and good men, in the love of truth, and in an ear- 
nest desire to promote the salvation of sinners, and 
the glory of the Redeemer, that they were sustained 
by the generous sacrifices, fervent prayers, and self- 
denying, and, in some cases, heroic labors of their 
friends ; and that they had been successful in a 
measure corresponding with these toils and sacrifices, 
and adapted to inspire gratitude for the past, and 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 43 

confidence in regard to the future. Whether the 
best plans had been adopted to carry forward the 
work of evangelization was certainly a debatable 
question ; and none were more solicitous for its 
proper solution than those who were most promi- 
nently and actively engaged in the prosecution of 
these various plans. To affirm that vanity^ selfish- 
ness, and sectarian zeal had no part in the main- 
tenance of these schemes, would be to affirm what 
no person, the least acquainted with the imper- 
fections of human nature, would believe. But it 
may be safely affirmed, that since the days of primi- 
tive Christianity^ no systematic efforts for the diffu- 
sion of truth and piety have involved so large an 
amount of self-denial, privation, toil, sacrifice and 
suffering, as modern missions to the heathen, with 
their various kindred enterprises. The friends and 
supporters of the different benevolent institutions 
were entitled to the most candid and liberal treat- 
ment from those who, dift'ering from them as to the 
expediency of their plans, sympathized with them 
in the sublime and glorious objects at which they 
aimed. 

Mr. Campbell commenced his editorial career with 
pretty strong opposition to these religious enterprises. 
Finding them identified with what he called the 
popular Christianity of the day, he deemed it ne- 
se^i^ary to subvert their influence that his reforma- 



44 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

tion miglit triumph. In his preface to the Chris- 
tian Baptist^ he thus wrote : 

^^ There is another difficulty of which we are 
aware^ that, as some .ohjects are manifestly good, 
and the means attempted for their accomplishment 
manifestly evil, speaking against the means em- 
ployed we may be sometimes understood as opposing 
the object abstractly, especially by those who do not 
wish to understand, but rather to misrepresent. 
For instance — that the conversion of the heathen 
to the Christian religion is an object manifestly good 
all Christians will acknowledge ; yet every one ac- 
quainted with the means employed, and of the 
success attendant on the means, must know that 
these means have not been blessed ; and every in- 
telUgent Christian must know that many of the 
means employed have been manifestly evil. Besides, 
to convert the heathen to the popular Christianity 
of these times would be an object of no great con- 
sequence, as the popular Christians themselves, for 
the most part, require to be converted to the Chris- 
tianity of the New Testament.'' Chn. Bap., 4. 

It is not surprising that the Keformer, convinced 
that the sects did not preach the ^^ ancient Gospel,'' 
and needed themselves to be converted to the Chris- 
tianity of the New Testament, should have been 
without sympathy for their missionary schemes. 
They were, in his judgment, unauthorized by Christ, 
and subversive of his throne and government. His 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 45 

plan for the conversion of the world^ or what he 
supposed the Divine plan, was first to convert all 
Christian sects to the Christianity of the New Tes- 
tament. Till this desirable object could be attain- 
ed, not an eifort was to be put forth for the conver- 
sion of the heathen, ^^An attempt/' said he, ^^to 
convert Pagans and Mahometans to believe that 
Jesus is the Son of Grod, and the sent of the Father, 
is also an attempt to frustrate the prayer of the 
Messiah, and to subvert his throne and government.'^ 
Chn. Bap., 135. But even after the conversion of 
the Christian sects, and their union in one church, 
no missionaries are to be sent forth for the conver- 
sion of the heathen. ^^The Bible,'' he says, ^^ gives 
us no idea of a missionary without the power of work- 
ing miracles. Miracles and missionaries," and, he 
might add, preaching the Gospel, '^are inseparably 
connected in the New Testament." Chn. Bap., 15. 
Christians must ^^form themselves into societies 
independent of hireling priests and ecclesiastical 
courts, modelled after the forum., the parliament, 
or national conventions," and ^^cast to the moles 
and to the bats the Platonic speculations, the Pytha- 
gorean dreams, and Jewish fables they have written 
in their creeds ;" ^' return to the ancient model de- 
lineated in the New Testament ;" ^^and keep the 
ordinances as delivered to them by the apostles." 
Then suppose a Christian church were to be placed 
on the confines of a heathen land, as some of them 



46 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

must inevitably be^ the darkness of paganism will 
serve, as a shade in a picture, to exhibit the lustre 
of Christianity. Then the heathen around them 
will see their humility ; their heavenly-mindedness^ 
their hatred of garments spotted with the fleshy 
their purity, their chastity^ their temperance, their 
sobriety, their brotherly love ; they will observe the 
order of their worship, and will fall down in their 
assemblies, as Paul affirms, and declare that God is 
in them of a truth.'' Such was the Bethany plan 
for evangelizing the world. But if the work of 
evangelization on the ^^ confines of heathen lands'' 
should progress slowly, and it should seem desirable 
to adopt more active and aggressive measures for its 
prosecution — then to avoid the necessity of sending 
missionaries, for Avhich there is no scripture author- 
ity, if there can ^^be found such a society," as that 
above described, though it be '^ composed of but 
twenty, willing to emigrate to some heathen land, 
where they can support themselves like the natives, 
wear the same garb, adopt the country as their own, 
and profess nothing like a missionary project; should 
such a society sit down and hold forth in word and 
deed the saving truth, not deriding the gods nor 
the religion of the natives, but allowing their own 
works and example to speak for their religion, and 
practicing as above hinted; we are persuaded that, 
in process of time, a more solid foundation for the 
conversion of the natives would be laid, and more 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 47 

actual success resulting, than from all the mission- 
aries employed for twenty-five years. Such a course 
would have some warrant from Scripture, but the 
present has proved itself to be all human.'' Chn. 
Bap., 16-17. 

It is not my purpose to discuss at large this 
scheme for evangelizing the world, but I must 
make a few remarks in passing. That churches 
should be pure and conformed to the New Testa- 
ment model ; and that such churches, situated on 
the borders of heathen lands, or elsewhere, would 
exert a good influence, must be conceded. That 
they would have full authority to emigrate to a 
heathen country, and hold forth the word of life ; 
and that doing so, they might be useful, must also 
be admitted. But what reason there is for claiming 
for this scheme of propagating the Gospel peculiarly 
the Divine sanction, I know not. As a plan for 
converting the heathen it is sustained neither by 
apostolic precept nor example. Aggressions on the 
domain of heathenism have always been made by 
missionaries — who have gone forth, singly or in 
small bands, with or without the power of working 
miracles, with the truth of Christ on their lips, and 
the love of Christ in their hearts, to instruct, per- 
suade and convert men, and to found churches amid 
the surrounding darkness. This is Grod's plan — en- 
forced by the command of Christ, and the example 
of the apostles — and sanctioned by the experience 



48 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

of the Christian world. The substitute proposed 
by Mr. 0. is untried^ impracticable^ chimerical. 

Had the Keformer confined himself to the advocacy 
of his new scheme of converting the world to Christ, 
or to candid^ generous and faithful criticisms on the 
missionary^ and other benevolent schemes of the 
time, his labors would probably have attracted but 
little attention, or, at most, would have produced 
no serious strife. But such a course did not accord 
with the genius and spirit of the man. At first, 
and for a short time, he wrote rather cautiously and 
hesitatingly concerning Christian missions. ^^ It 
may be worthy,'' said he, '^ of the serious considera- 
tion of many of the zealous advocates of the various 
sectarian missions in our day, whether, in a few 
years, the same things may not be said of their 
various projects which they themselves affirm of the 
Catholic missions, and missionaries.^' Chn. Bap., 
14. But this inquiring tone soon gave place to 
that of dogmatism and denunciation. Upon the 
benevolent associations, the vials of his unmitigated 
wrath were soon poured out. All the resources of 
his learning, wit, and ridicule, were employed to 
undermine their influence, and bring them into con- 
tempt. Whatever was published in infidel, or semi- 
infidel papers in disparagement of missionaries, was 
promptly transferred to the columns of the Christian 
Baptist, without comment, or with approbation ; 
while allusions to the self-denials, toils, suff*erings, 



OAMPBELLISM IK ITS CHAOS. 49 

and successes of missionaries, were studiously omit- 
ted. Mr. Campbeirs chief instrument in opposing 
Christian missions, and promoting his Reformation, 
was caricaturing — -an art for which his genius pecu- 
liarly fitted him. But, as his opposition to missions^ 
and cognate enterprises, had much influence in sev- 
ering the Reformers from the Baptists, I will quote 
copiously from the columns of his monthly pamphlet, 
pretty much at random on these topics. 

'^ The order of their assemblies (the primitive 
churches,) was uniformly the same. It did not vary 
with moons and seasons. It did not change as dress 
nor fluctuate as the manners of the times. Their 
devotion did not diversify itself into the endless 
forms of modern times. They had no monthly con- 
certs for prayer ; no solemn convocations, no great 
fasts, nor preparation, nor thanksgiving days. 
Their churches were not fractured into missionary 
societies, Bible societies, education societies ; nor 
did they dream of organizing such in the world. 
The head of a believing household was not in those 
days a president or manager of a board of foreign 
missions ; his wife the president of some female edu- 
cation society ; his eldest son, the recording secre- 
tary of some domestic Bible society ; his eldest 
daughter, the corresponding secretary of a mite 
society ; his servant-maid, the vice-president of a 
rag society ; and his little daughter, a tutoress of a 
Sunday-school. They knew nothing of the hobbies 



50 CVMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

of modern times. In their cliurcli capacity alone 
they moved. They neither transformed themselves 
into any other kind of association, nor did they frac- 
ture and sever themselves into divers societies. 
They viewed the church of Jesus Christ as the 
scheme of Heaven to ameliorate the world ; as 
members of it, they considered themselves bound 
to do all they could for the glory of God and the 
good of men. They dare not transfer to a missionary 
society, or Bible society, or education society, a 
cent or a prayer, lest in so doing they should rob 
the church of its glory, and exalt the inventions of 
men above the wisdom of Grod. In their church 
capacity alone they moved.'' Chn. Bap., 6. 

^^ ^ Missionaries to Burmah. — On Wednesday, 
the 11th of June, at Utica, New York, the Kev. 
Jonathan Wade and his consort were set apart as 
missionaries to the Burman empire, by a committee 
of the board of managers of the Baptist General 
Convention. An interesting sermon was delivered 
on the occasion by the Eev. Nathaniel Kendrick, 
from 2 Tim. ii. 10 . ' Therefore I endure all things 
for the elects^ sake, that they also may obtain the 
salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal 
glory.' Eev. Alfred Bennet led in offering up the 
consecrating prayer. Eev. Daniel Hascall gave 
Mr. Wade an appropriate charge, and the Eev. Joel 
W. Clark gave him the right hand of fellowship, 
^ that he should go to the heathen ;' Eev. John Peck 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 51 

addressed Mrs. Wade, and Kev. Elon Galuslia gave 
lier the right hand of fellowship. Kev. Elijah F. 
Willey offered the concluding prayer. The services 
were performed in Kev. Mr. Atkins' meeting-house. 
The day was fine, and the assemblage was very 
large, and proved, by their fixed and silent atten- 
tion to the services, how much they felt for the 
world that lieth in wickedness ; and by a collection 
of $86.23 taken on the spot, they showed a willing- 
ness to share in the pleasure and expense of spread- 
ing the Gospel in all the earth. 

^^' ' Mr. Wade is a young man, and a native of the 
state of New York. He received his classical and 
theological education in the theological seminary at 
Hamilton. He appeared before the committee a 
man of good sense, of ardent piety, and understand- 
ingly led by the Spirit of God to the work in which 
he has now engaged. Mrs. Wade is from a respect- 
able family in Hamilton, Madison County, daughter 
of deacon Lapham. Her early piety and active zeal 
in the cause of her Redeemer, has encouraged the 
hope that she will be eminently useful in the cause 
of missions with her husband. — Latter Day Lumi- 
nary' 

'' Note by the Editor, — How accordant is the lan- 
guage and spirit of the above to the following 
passage from the 13th chapter of the Acts of the 
Apostles : — ^On Wednesday, the 11th of June, A. 
D, 4:4: J the Kev. Saulus Paulus and the Rev. Joses 



52 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

Barnabas were set apart as missionaries to the Gen- 
tiles dis23ersed througliout the world, by a commit- 
tee of the board of managers of the Baptist Greneral 
Convention, met in the city of Antioch. An inter- 
esting sermon was delivered on the occasion by the 
Kev. Simon Niger, from Isaiah xlii. 4 : ' The isles 
shall wait for his law/ Eev. Lucius, of Cyrene, led 
in offering up the consecrating prayer. Eev. Man- 
aen gave Mr. Paulus and his companion (Mr. 
Barnabas) an appropriate charge ; and the Kev. 
John Mark gave them the right hand of fellowship, 
^that they should go to the heathen.' The Kev. 
Lucius, of Cyrene, offered up the concluding jDrayer. 
The services were performed in the Kev. Mr. Simon 
Niger's meeting-house. The day was fine, and the 
assemblage was very large, and proved, by their 
fixed and silent attention to the services, how much 
they felt for the world that lieth in wickedness ; and 
by a collection of $86.25, they showed a willingness 
to aid the Kev. Mr. Paulus, and the Kev. Mr. Bar- 
nabas in carrying the Gospel to the heathen. 

'' Mr. Paulus is a young man, and a native of the 
city of Tarsus ; he received his classical and theo- 
logical education in the theological seminary in 
Jerusalem. He appeared before the committee a 
man of good sense, of ardent piety, and understand- 
ingly led by the spirit of God to the work in which 
he has now engaged. 

^^ It is, then, plain that the above notification is 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 63 

just in the spirit and style of this passage from the 
13th chapter of the Acts. But in the common 
translation, the original loses much of its apti- 
tude and beauty ; for lo ! it reads thus : ^ Now 
there was in the church that was at Antioch, certain 
prophets and teachers ; as, Barnabas, and Simon 
that was called Niger, and Lucius of Gyrene, and 
Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod 
the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the 
Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me 
Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have 
called them. And when they had fasted and prayed, 
and laid their hands on them, they sent them 
away.' '' Chn. Bap., 17. 

'^ Our objections to the missionary plan originated 
from the conviction that it is unauthorized in the 
New Testament ; and that, in many instances, it is 
a system of iniquitous peculation and speculation, 
I feel perfectly able to maintain both the one and 
the other of these positions. .... Not question- 
ing the piety and philanthropy of many of the ori- 
ginators, and present abettors of the missionary 
T)lan, we must say that the present scheme is not 
authorized by our King. This, I think, Ave proved 
some time ago ; and no man that we have heard of, 
has come forward to oppose our views. Indeed, I 
think, we have few men of any information, who would 
come forward openly to defend the plan of saving the 
world by means of money and science ; of converting 



54 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

pagans by funds raised indirect!}* from spinning- 
wheels, fruit stalls, corn-fields, melon patches, potato 
lots, rags, children's playthings, and religious news- 
papers, consecrated to missionary purposes ; and 
from funds raised directly by begging from every 
body, of every creed, and of no creed whatever. By 
sending out men to preach begging sermons, and to 
tell the people of A/s missionary patch of potatoes 
producing twice as much per acre, as those destined 
for himself and children ; of B.'s uncommon crop of 
missionary wheat, a ]3art of which he covetously 
alienated from the missionary to himself, and, as a 
judgment upon him, his cow broke into his barn and 
ate of it until she killed herself; of E.'s missionary 
sheep having each yeaned tvv^o lambs a-piece, while 
his own only yeaned him one a-piece, and a variety 
of other miracles v/rought in favor of the missionary 
fund. I say, vv^hat man of good common sense and 
of a reasonable mind would come forward to defend 
a scheme of convertins: the world bv such means, 
and by the means of that very ^ vain philosophy' 
and ^ science falsely so called,' condemned by the 
apostles." Chn. Bap., 53, 54. 

^'^ Mr. Bohert Cautious . . . You think that it was 
rather going to an extreme to rank Bible societies 
with other popular schemes. Perhaps a more inti- 
mate acquaintance with our views of Christianity 
would induce you to think as we do upon this sub- 
ject. We are convinced, fully convinced, that the 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 55 

whole head is sick^ and the whole heart faint of 
modern fashionable Christianity — that many of the 
schemes of the populars resemble the delirium, the 
wild fancies of a subject of fever, in its highest 
paroxysms — ^andthat these most fashionable projects 
deserve no more regard from sober Christians, Chris- 
tians intelligent in the 'Sev^ Testament, than the 
vagaries, the febrile flights of patients in an inflam- 
matory fever. We admit that it is quite as difficult 
to convince the populars of the folly of their pro- 
jects, as it generally is to convince one in a febrile 
reverie, that he is not in the possession of his 
reason.'' Chn. Bap., 33. 

" I honestly confess that the popular clergy and 
their schemes appear to me fraught with mischief to 
the temporal and eternal interests of men, and 
would anxiously wish to see them converted into 
useful members, or bishops, or deacons of the 
Christian church. How has their influence spoiled 
the best gifts of heaven to men ! Civil liberty has 
always fallen beneath their sway — the inalienable 
rights of men have been wrested from their hands — 
and even the very margin of the Bible polluted with 
their inventions, their rabbinical dreams and whim- 
sical nonsense. The Bible cannot be disseminated 
without their appendages-, and if children are taught 
to read in a Sunday school, their pockets must be 
filled with religious tracts, the object of which is 
either directly or indirectly to bring them under the 



56 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

domination of some creed or sect. Even the dis- 
tribution of the Bible to the poor^ must be followed 
up with those tracts^ as if the Bible dare not be 
trusted in the hands of a layman^ without a priest 
or his representative at his elbow. It is on this ac- 
count that I have, for some time, viewed both 
' Bible societies/ and ^ Sunday schools/ as a sort 
of recruiting establishments, to fill up the ranks of 
those sects which take the lead in them. It is true 
that we rejoice to see the Bible sjpread, and the poor 
taught to read by those means ; but notwithstand- 
ing this, we ought not, as we conceive, to suffer the 
|3olicy of many engaged therein to pass unnoticed, 
or to refrain from putting those on their guard who 
are likely to be caught by ^ the sleight of men and 
cunning craftiness.' '" Chn. Bap., 80. 

The foregoing extracts pretty clearly indicate the 
spirit and manner of Mr. CampbelFs warfare against 
Christian missions, and similar enterprizes. Some 
points in them, however, are entitled to special at- 
tention. 

Notice, in the first place, a manifest fallacy in 
argument. The argument is implied, not distinctly 
expressed, by Mr. C. It is this — all religious insti- 
tutions not existing in the days of the apostles are 
unauthorized. There were no mission and Bible 
societies in the days of the apostles. Therefore 
these societies are unauthorized. The fallacy in the 
argument lies in not. distinguishing between what is 



CAMPBELLIBM IN ITS CHAOS. 57 

essential and what is circumstantial in Christianity 
— a difference fully admitted by Mr. C. Chn. Sys.^ 
p. 74. Christianity has its doctrine^ facts^ laws, 
and promises ; and these are settled and immutable ; 
but many things relating to the progress and estab- 
lishment of Christianity were^ of necessity, left to 
be decided by time and circumstances — in short, by 
expediency. In the days of the apostles, there 
were no translations of the Scriptures, no houses, 
so far as we are informed, erected for religious w^or- 
ship, no religious periodicals, no Christian editors, 
and no alms-houses ; but are all these unauthor- 
ized ? May not Christian churches, and individual 
Christians, combine for any, and every good purpose, 
in such manner as they may deem expedient, pro- 
vided that in so doing they violate no law of Christ ? 
But what law — what moral obligation, is violated 
by missionary societies ? They propose to convert 
the world to Christ — is this right ? They propose 
to accomplish the work by the promulgation of the 
Gospel of Christ — is this authorized ? They pro- 
pose to diffuse the light of the Gospel by sustaining 
and encouraging men who believe and love the 
Gospel, and exemplify its excellence in their lives, 
to proclaim it among the heathen — is this unauthor- 
ized ? The truth is, if Christians are authorized to 
do any thing, they are authorized, as churches or 
individuals, to enter into any combinations, or em- 
ploy any means, not interdicted by divine authority, 



68 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

to spread the knowledge of salvation. '^ Let him 
that heareth say^ Gome!' 

In the next place^ direct your attention to Mr. 
Campbeirs usual art of caricaturing^ and aiming to 
bring into derision^ sacred and solemn things. One 
among many instances of its exercise may be select- 
ed for illustration. The account furnished by the 
Latter Day Luminary of the setting apart of Mr. 
and Mrs. Wade as missionaries to Burmah is plain, 
unostentatious, solemn, and in good taste. Mr. and 
Mrs. Wade hare proved themselves, by a long life, 
to be eminently humble, self-denying, and devoted 
servants of Christ. The ministers who participated 
in the services of the occasion were among the best 
men living — -venerable for their age, their piety, 
their wisdom, and their labors. The services were 
most appropriate — ^consisting of prayer, preaching 
the word, suitable addresses, and giving the right 
hand of fellowship. The assembly was large, atten- 
tive, and deeply interested ; and the scene was one 
on which, no doubt, angels looked with delight, and 
God with approbation. Had such men, in such a 
service, and under such circumstances, erred, their 
error would have deserved to be treated with the 
greatest candor and forbearance. Yet this very 
scene is, in a note by the Editor of the Christian 
Baptist, caricatured, with heartless and revolting 
levity ; and that too at a period when the writer 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 59 

could not plead in extenuation of his course tlie in- 
discretion of youth. 

The Christian Baptist, having attained a wide 
circulation, exerted a potent influence against the 
cause of Christian missions, and Christian benevo- 
lence generally. The sentiments which it incul- 
cated, and the spirit which it infused, on these 
subjects, were too congenial to the indolence and 
selfishness of human nature, not to meet a cordial 
reception from many. Wherever the Christian 
Baptist spread, the cause of missions declined. 
'' Your paper,^' wrote a Kentucky correspondent, 
^^has well nigh stopped missionary operations in 
this State.'' Chn. Bap., 144. And what was true 
of its blighting influence in Kentucky, was equally 
true of its influence in Virginia, Ohio, and every 
place, where its visits were welcomed. 

^^ Christian Ex2oerience " is a phrase, not found in 
the Scriptures, and not, perhaps, wisely chosen, 
but it was, at the commencement of Mr. Campbell's 
I'eformation, as it is now, in very common use, and 
of well defined, and well understood meaning. 
It related to a subject of great importance — one 
held in the highest estimation by all evangelical 
Christians. It denotes that series of conflicts, exer- 
cises and emotions, springing from a gradual know- 
ledge of Divine truth, and the influence of the 
Holy Spirit, which results in the conversion of the 
soul to Christ, and accompanies this event. Much 



60 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

has improperly passed under the name of Christian 
experience ; and great mischief has arisen from 
ignorance or misconception on the subject. Many 
persons have mistaken excitements, fancies, dreams, 
and other extravagances, for genuine conversion, 
and not unfrequently amid much ignorance and 
superstition have been found the marks of sincere 
piety. Christian experience is greatly modified by 
temperament, education, religious instruction, and 
the circumstances under v/nich conversion occurs. 
Men of a phlegmatic temperament may embrace 
the Gospel with comparatively little feeling. Men 
of ardent temperament and vivid imaginations, like 
John Bunyan, and Colonel Gardiner, are likely to 
receive the Gospel with intense and overwhelming 
emotions, and these emotions are sometimes accom- 
panied by fancied ^^ visions and revelations.'" We 
should carefully distinguish between what is circum- 
stantial and what is essential in Christian experience. 
We should separate the chaff from the wheat. All 
that is superstitious, visionary, extravagant — in fine, 
all that will not bear the test of Scripture, should 
be rejected ; but we should beware of condemning 
the jDrecious with the vile — the genuine with the 
spurious. Conviction of sin, godly sorrow, faith in 
Christ, an obedient spirit, love, peace, joy and hope, 
are elements of genuine Christian experience. No 
intelligent, evangelical Christian has ever placed 
saving experience in any thing short of those im- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 61 

pressionSj exercises and feelings whicli are essential 
to a passage ^^from death unto life/' Every godly 
man clings v/ith unyielding tenacity to the reality 
of his ChristiPon experience. He would no sooner 
renounce it than his salvation. There may, indeed, 
be religion — its name — its form — its pomp — its sac- 
rifices — without it ; but it is spiritless, heartless 
and worthless. 

Mr. Campbeirs early writings on the subject of 
experimental religion gave great pain to the friends 
of spiritual Christianity. Some things which he 
published on this subject were worthy of grave con- 
sideration. He exposed with clearness and severity 
the illusions and extravagances which, among the 
uncultivated and ignorant, especially the negroes, 
was current as Christian experience. These evils 
were seen, deplored, and opposed by all well in- 
formed Christians, long before he commenced his 
Keformation. They are evils inseparable, perhaps, 
from the progress of earnest piety among an illite- 
rate and excitable people ; but from which a specu- 
lative, heartless formalism is a certain preservative. 
He condemned the practice common among Baptists 
and some other evangelical Christians of requiring 
from candidates for church membership a relation 
of their experience. The practice he considered to 
be, not only unauthorized, but injurious. That it 
has sometimes been abused by the ignorant, or mis- 
judging, none vvill deny ; but that churches should 



62 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

avail themselves of the best means in their power — 
imperfect^ at best — to judge correctly of the sin- 
cerity, knowledge and piety of persons wishing to 
enter into their fellowship, seems evident from the 
nature of the connexion. And a brief, clear narra- 
tive of their religious exercises, or direct answers to 
a few plain, pertinent questions adapted to elicit 
information on this subject, will greatly facilitate 
this object. Philip did not baptize the Ethiopian 
eunuch, who requested baptism, until he had cate- 
chised him. Acts 8 : 37. True, the evangelist 
propounded but one question to the candidate — or, 
at least, in the concise narrative furnished by Luke, 
only one is recorded — that, under the circumstances, 
being deemed sufficient. It should be borne in 
mind that the Ethiopian was an intelligent man — a 
reader of the Scriptures — had been to Jerusalem to 
worship — and had been receiving personal instruc- 
tion from Philip. The evangelist asked the candi- 
date the question which was most likely to elicit the 
true state of his heart, and the answer was satisfac- 
tory. This example, so far from restricting pastors 
or churches, in the examination of candidates for 
baptism, to this brief and single question — a ques- 
tion never, so far as we are informed, proposed to 
any other applicant for the ordinance, in apostolic 
times — fairly authorizes them to make such in- 
quiries as the intelligence, known characters, and 
circumstances, of the candidates may appear to re- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 63 

quire. But whether the necessary information 
shall be obtained by asking questions^ or by the 
connected narrative of the candidates for church 
fellowship^ is a point about which none but hair- 
splitting speculatists would stickle. Though Mr. 
Campbell differed from the Baptists generally on 
this subject, the difference would have caused no 
serious strife between them. His views on this 
point were not peculiar. Several evangelical de- 
nominations, held in high and deserved estimation 
by the Baptists, received members into full com- 
munion without requiring a recital of their Chris- 
tian experience. What the Baptists maintained 
was, that persons were not entitled to church mem- 
bership, without the various exercises, comprehend- 
ed in conversion, or regeneration, which they 
termed '^ Christian experience,^^ and which are par- 
ticularly pointed out in the commencement of this 
article. On this point they have never wavered, 
and, God grant, they never may. The propriety 
of relating an experience before a church is one 
thing — the indispensable necessity of an experience 
• — a '^ Christian experience'^ — in order to legitimate 
church communion is another, and far more im- 
portant matter. 

Now, it was in regard to the latter, and not the 
former point, that the remarks of Mr. Campbell 
caused so much pain among considerate and earnest 
Christians. He treated the subject with a levity, 



64 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

sarcasm^ and disregard of tlie feelings of holy men, 
which can be fairly characterized by no term less 
offensive than shocking. Good men stood aghast 
at the freedom and severity with which he treated 
a subject that they had been accustomed to regard 
with feelings of awe^ not, perhaps, unmingled with 
superstition. It is just to him to say that, so far as 
I can perceive, he did not deny the reality or the 
necessity of what others termed " Christian expe- 
rience,'' but he wrote equivocally on the subject. 
He knew that he was accused of rejecting Christian 
experience — spiritual religion — and that his peculiar 
views of faith and repentance were supposed to lead 
to this result — and yet the frank and full avowal on 
these points, requisite to quiet the fears, not of the 
captious, but of the intelligent, pious and candid, 
who looked with favor on some portions of his Ee- 
formation, was studiously withheld. Some para- 
graphs, considered alone, would appear to establish 
the soundness of his views on experimental religion ; 
but others would throw a doubt over his meaning. 
To satisfy those who called in question the correct- 
ness of his opinions on this subject, he wrote — ^^ It 
is said that we have taught that there is no neces- 
sity of being born again by the Spirit of God ; and 
that we have denied that Christians are new crea- 
tures, and that we have confined all divine grace to 
the apostolic age. Now we must confess that we 
did not intend to communicate such ideas ; nor do 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 65 

we think that such can he fairly gathered from our 
words/' But soon he added — ^' We have discovered 
that something under the name of '^ experimental 
religion'' is the very soul of the popular system" — 
and the reader has seen the estimate in which he 
held that system. Chn. Bap., 64. See also pp. 
48-49. 

A few quotations must suffice to exhibit the views 
of Mr. Campbell on the subject of experimental re- 
ligion^ and his spirit and manner in discussing it. 

'' It is^ perhaps^ chiefly owing to the religious 
theories imbibed in early life from creeds, cate- 
chisms, and priests, that so few comparatively enjoy 
the grace of God which brings salvation. The grace 
of God, exhibited in the record concerning Jesus of 
Nazareth, affords no consolation. The hopes and 
joys of many spring from a good conceit of them- 
selves. If this good conceit vanishes, which some- 
times happens, despondency and distress are the 
consequences. While they can, as they conceit, 
thank God that they are not like other men, they 
are very happy ; but when this fancied excellency 
disappears, the glad tidings afford no consolation : 
anguish and distress have come upon them. This, 
with some of the spiritual doctors, is a good symp- 
tom too : for, say they, ' if you do not doubt we 
will doubt for you/ When they have worked them 
into despondency, they minister a few opiates, and 
assure them that they are now in a safe and happy 



66 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

state. Now they are to rejoice^ "because they are 
sorrowful ; now they are to feel very good, because 
they feel so very bad. This is the orthodox ' Chris- 
tian experience.' This is the genuine work of the 
Holy Spirit !" Chn. Bap., 138. 

Did Mr. Campbell really believe that this carica- 
ture, which he drew, was '^ the orthodox Christian 
experience'' — '^ the genuine work of the Holy Spirit'^ 
— for which the evangelical Christians of that time 
pleaded ? It is charitable to think so. But how 
a man of Mr. Campbell's intelligence^ erudition, 
general information, and accurate observation, could 
have reached such a conclusion, it is not easy to 
comprehend. It will not be denied that the evil 
which Mr. Campbell portrayed was real, and de- 
served correction. In all religious denominations 
there may be ignorant, enthusiastic and misguided 
teachers. He will concede that there are such in 
the churches enrolled under the banner of his own 
Reformation — or if he should not, the means of his 
conviction are at hand. But is it fair to charge the 
crudities and errors of such teachers to orthodoxy ? 
No evangelical Christian denomination, has ever en- 
dorsed such an experience as Mr. Campbell has de- 
lineated in this paragraph, either from his prolific 
imagination, or the teachings and doings of ignorant 
enthusiasts. He may be safely challenged to furnish 
from any creed, document, accredited writer, or re- 
spectable journal, of any Christian persuasion, the 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 67 

outline of an approved experience^ so defective and 
unscriptural as this ^^ orthodox Christian expe- 
rience/' I have been in the Christian ministry- 
more than thirty years^ and I have no recollection of 
having read in any book^ or heard from the lips of 
any teacher, approved by any orthodox Christian 
denomination, the description of a saving experience, 
which did not include Godly sorrow, the renuncia- 
tion of sins, and trust in Christ for salvation. To 
represent an experience, having no allusion to con- 
viction of sin, sorrow for it, hatred of it, the aban- 
donment of it, faith in Christ, love to him, and an 
obedient disposition — in short, a change of heart — 
not as the experience of a few ignorant and excited 
enthusiasts — but as ^Hhe orthodox Christian ex- 
perience'' — '^the genuine work of the Holy Spirit,'^ 
is to misrepresent — it may be, ignorantly, or care- 
lessly, or in the heat of party zeal — but nevertheless 
to misrepresent, most grossly, the class of men 
among whom is to be found most of the intelligent 
piety which the world contains. 

It is proper to furnish another extract on this 
subject, of later date, but of similar spirit. Chn. 
Sys., p. 244, 245. 

^' Effects of Modern Christianity. — Our great- 
est objection to the systems which we oppose, is 
their impotency on the heart. Alas ! what multi- 
tudes of prayerless, saintless, Christless, joyless 
hearts, have crowded Christianity out of the congre- 



68 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

gations by their experiences before baptism ! They 
seem to have had all their religion before they pro- 
fessed it. They can relate no experience since 
baptism, comparable to that professed before the 
" mutual pledge'' was tendered and received. It 
was the indubitable proofs of the superabundance 
of this fruity which caused me to suspect the far- 
famed tree of evangelical orthodoxy. That cold- 
heartedness — that stiff and mercenary formality — 
that tithing of mint, anise, and dill — that negligence 
of mercy, justice, truth, and the love of God, which 
stalked through the communions of sectarian altars 
— that apathy and indifference about ' tlius saith 
the Lord' — that zeal for human prescriptions, and 
above all, that willing ignorance of the sayings and 
doings of Jesus Christ and his apostles, which so 
generally appeared, first of a,ll created, fostered, and 
matured my distrust in the reformed systems of 
evangelical sectaries.'" 

When Mr. Campbell commenced his labors, the 
state of Protestant Christendom was not such as 
the pious heart might desire. In all communions 
there were obvious, acknowledged, and grievous 
evils. The comj)arative inefficacy of all the means 
employed for the moral renovation of men was but 
too manifest. All good men united with the devout 
Psalmist in the desire, '^ Oh, let the wickedness of 
the wicked come to an end !'' But did these evils 
in the churches spring from '' experiences before 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 69 

baptism ?'' Did the requiring of experiences pre- 
paratory to baptism and cliurcli fellowship crowd 
Christianity out of the churches^ by introducing 
^^ multitudes of prayerless, saintless, Christless, joy- 
less hearts ?'' Or did these evils originate in tho 
moral corruption of human nature^ and the deterior- 
ating tendencies of a world enslaved by sin ? A 
large majority of the evangelical churches did not 
require ^^experiencesbefore baptism ;''what ^^ crowd- 
ed Christianity'' out of them ? There were great 
and deplorable evils in the churches gathered and 
instructed by the apostles — and that too before they 
closed their ministry — did ^^ experiences before bap- 
tism'' produce them ? The truth is^ nothing could 
be more unfair, unphilosophical, and deceptive, than 
to reason as Mr. Campbell did. He had, in some 
respects, an easy task before him. It demanded 
but little research or labor to detect, publish, and 
magnify the evils in the various Christian commun- 
ions. All these evils Mr. Campbell boldly and 
confidently ascribed, without discrimination, fairness, 
or qualification, to ^^ sectarian bigotry," ^^ popular 
Christianity," '^evangelical orthodoxy," or '^ exjpe- 
riences before baptism/' With equal zeal and 
assurance, he proclaimed that the sovereign remedy 
for all these evils, was a return to the " Ancient 
Gospel,"- — not as it had been received and practised 
by the wise and good of every land, but as it was 
understood and interpreted at Bethany. Many saw 



70 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS, 

and deplored these evils^ earnestly desired their cor- 
rectionj and embraced the Bethany exposition of the 
Gospel that their wishes might be realized. Churches 
were organized according to the '^ ancient order of 
things/' from which there is no danger that Chris- 
tianity will be crowded out by ^^ experiences before 
baptism/' The public have had an opportunity of 
comparing the fruits of the Reformation with the 
fruits of ^^ the far-famed tree of evano;elical ortho- 
doxy/' It is not proper to anticipate what it is pro- 
posed to state in another part of this work ; but I 
will mention a single fact. A few years ago, one 
of the earliest, most intelligent, and devoted of the 
friends of the ^^ ancient order of things/' said can- 
didly, that the Reformation had not proved as per^ 
feet in practise as it was in theory. 

Some extracts having been given from the writings 
of Mr. Campbell, as specimens of his manner of 
treating experimental religion, it is proper that he 
should have the benefit of his apology for the sever- 
ity of his style. 

" The reader," he says, ^^ may perhaps think 
that we speak too irreverently of the practice and 
of the experience of many Christians. We have no 
such intention. But there are many things when 
told or represented just as they are, which appear 
so strange, and, indeed, fanciful, that the mere rela- 
tion of them assumes an air of irony/' Chn. Bap., 
141., Note. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 71 

Whether the defense mends the matter, the 
reader must judge for himself. Another, if not a 
better, apology for Mr. Campbell's course may be 
suggested. If he was really convinced that '^ or- 
thodox Christian experiences'' were, as he represent- 
ed them, Christless, graceless and senseless — an 
artificial despondency cured by noxious opiates — 
then, perhaps, no apology was necessary. "We can 
only lament that a man of his conceded abilities 
should have had his judgment so sadly perverted— 
by no matter what baleful influence. 

As it is proposed, in another part of this volume, 
to examine particularly the principles of Campbell- 
ism, I shall in this chapter merely glance at those 
which distinguished this period of the Reformation, 
It has been already observed, that the teaching of 
Mr. Campbell, through the columns of the Christian 
Baptist, was negative rather than positive— was in- 
tended to overthrow, and bring into disrepute the 
popular theology, rather than to develope any pecu- 
liar religious principles. The current teachings of 
all the prevailing Christian sects, whether oral, or 
written, whether in creeds, sermons, expositions of 
the Scriptures, or any other form, were deemed by 
him, and his admirers, vain speculations, philosophi- 
cal subtleties, or orthodox nonsense. Gradually, 
and slowly, however, his doctrinal peculiarities 
began to be evolved. Having referred to the period- 



72 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

icals and other works^ which advocated his peculiar 
principles^ he wrote — 

^' The Christian Baptist in seven annual vol- 
umeSj being the first of these publications, and 
affording such a gradual development of these 
principles as the state of the public mind and the 
opposition would permit, is, in the judgment of 
many of our brethren, who have expressed them- 
selves on the subject, better adapted to the whole 
community as it now exists, than our other writ- 
ings/' Chn. Sys., p. 10. 

Whether Mr. Campbell did not express his doc- 
trinal views clearly, or with uniformity ; or whether 
his opponents were unable, or unwilling to compre- 
hend his meaning, need not now to be decided. I 
certainly have never known a religious teacher 
whose views were involved in so much mist and un- 
certainty. From his writings might be culled pas- 
sages, which would satisfy the most strenuous ad- 
vocates of orthodoxy in respect to his soundness in 
the faith ; and from the same pages, other passages 
which seemed to threaten the very foundation of 
evangelical Christianity. By some he was charged 
with holding the most pestilential errors ; and by 
others he was considered the ablest uninsj)ired ex- 
pounder of the Christian faith. It began to be ap- 
parent, however, that there were serious discord- 
ances between his doctrinal views and those enter- 
tained by evangelical Christians, and especially the 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 73 

Baptists, with whom "he was particularly connected. 
These differences had reference to faith, repentance, 
regeneration, the remission of sins, the influence of 
the Holy Spirit, and other points of minor import- 
ance. He was understood to teach and maintain 
that faith is a simple persuasion that Jesus is the 
Messiah, which demands no influence of the Holy 
Spirit to incline the mind to its exercise — that re- 
pentance is a reformation of life — that regeneration 
is identical with baptism — that the remission of 
sins is enjoyed only through baptism — and that the 
Holy Spirit is bestowed only on the baptized. On 
no point, perhaps, did his teaching give such general 
dissatisfaction as in regard to the influence of the 
Holy Spirit in the moral renovation of man. The 
Baptists, in common with other orthodox Chris- 
tians, held this doctrine to be of vital importance. 
His teaching on the subject was, or to many it 
seemed to be evasive, contradictory, unsound, and 
of pernicious tendency. The reader will perceive 
in the following quotation the spirit and influence 
of his writings on this solemn and important sub- 
ject. 

'^ I read, some time since, of a revival in the 
state of New York, in which the Spirit of Grod was 
represented as being abundantly poured out on 
Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists. I think 
the converts in the order of the names were about 

three hundred Presbyterians, three hundred Metho- 

4 



74 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 

distS; and two hundred and eighty Baptists. Oi 
the principles of Bellamy, Hopkins, and Fuller, 
these being all regenerated without any knowledge 
of the Gospel, there is no difficulty in accounting 
for their joining different sects. The spirit did not 
teach the Presbyterians to believe that ^ God had 
foreordained w^hatsoever comes to pass ;^ nor the 
Methodists to deny it. He did not teach the Pres- 
byterians and the Methodists that infants were 
members of the church, and to be baptized ; nor 
the Baptists to deny it. But on the hypothesis of 
the Apostle James, viz : ^ Of his own will begat 
he us by the word of truth.' I think it would be 
difficult to prove that the Spirit of God had any 
thing to do with the aforesaid revival/' Chn. Bap., 
50. 

By some persons Mr. Campbell was suspected, 
and charged with leaning toward Unitarianism. 
For this impression I have never found any good 
ground. In his zeal to introduce what he termed 
'' a pure speech,^' he rejected the words '^ Trinity,'^ 
and " Trinitarianism,'' and also some notions, more 
or less prevalent, concerning the Trinity ; but so 
far as I can discover, he clearly and uniformly main- 
tained the doctrine of Christ's Godhead, and the 
vicarious and expiatory nature of his sufferings. 

It is unnecessary to pursue this subject much 
farther. It is not my purpose to point out all the 
sentiments and practices among evangelical Chris- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS, 75 

tians which incurred his displeasure^ and provoked 
his animadversions. The war was as general as it 
was fierce and relentless. Nothing was so venera- 
ble^ so sacred^ and so important^ in the estimation 
of others^ or so strongly entrenched in popular favor, 
as to shield it from his attacks. Objects^ in them- 
selves confessedly good, were denounced because 
they were pursued with sectarian zeal, and for sec- 
tarian purposes. In all the pages of the Christian 
Baptist it will be difficult to find a sentence com- 
mendatory of any institution, plan, custom, labor 
or interest of Christendom, apart from his own 
cherished Eeformation. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 

Various causes contributed to augment the in- 
fluence of Mr. Campbell, to diffuse his peculiar no- 
tions, and to facilitate the progress of his Reforma- 
tion. His information, self-command, boldness, and 
indomitable ardor, eminently fitted him to lead a 
party. His temperament, intellectual habits, and 
aspirations were all adapted to impel him to aban- 
don the beaten track of thought and labor, and to 
impart to his writings and preaching the charm of 
novelty. His views might not be scriptural, or 
wise, or important ; but they were, at least, un- 
common—and this was sufficient to render them 
acceptable to a certain class of minds. By his 
fearless and forcible defense of the distinctive senti- 
ments of the Baptists, in his debates with Messrs* 
Walker and McCalla, he secured extensively the 
confidence and esteem of the denomination. They 
were proud to acknowledge him as the bold and 
puissant champion of their cause— and they made 
the acknowledgment with more pleasure, because 
he had risen up suddenly, and in a quarter least ex-^ 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 77 

pected. They were, therefore^ ready to pay not 
only a candid but a confiding regard to anything he 
might publish. His ability and prowess as a public 
extempore debater, had given him a prestige most 
favorable to his influence and success. His oppo- 
nents too, with few exceptions, unwittingly pro- 
moted the Reformation. Instead of an open, manly 
and resolute discussion of the objectionable points 
in his scheme ; they carried on a petty warfare, cen- 
suring frequently without discrimination, wasting 
their resources in the discussion of trifles, and always 
ready to retreat at the first appearance of serious 
danger. I do not intend to reflect on the motives, 
or abilities, of the excellent fathers who early par- 
ticipated in the discussion of Campbellism — they 
pursued the course to which their judgment or their 
circumstances led them — but Mr. Campbell was too 
adroit an opponent not to interpret their guerrilla 
warfare as a proof of his invincibility, and the sound- 
ness of the cause which he had espoused. 

His opposition to sectarianism has been already 
mentioned ; and from this opposition, he not only 
brought on himself much reproach, but derived a 
large measure of his strength and influence. On 
the subject of sectarianism, his logic was precisely 
that VN'hich every quack employs to bring hi.s nos- 
trums into use. He expatiates earnestly on the 
inefficiency of the regular medical practice. There 
are some diseases for which physicians liave no 



78 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 

remedy ; for raariy others their prescriptions arc 
sadly and confessedly unsuccessful ; and, in not a 
few cases, their drugs have proved pernicious. Phy- 
sicians of the gieatest wisdom and "experience have 
lamented the impeifection of medical science, and the 
uncertainty of the healing art. These evils and ad- 
missions are paraded and duly magnified before the 
public, by the empiric, Avho proclaims his certified sove- 
reign panacea, while the credulous, and those who 
have despaired of aid from science, are caught by the 
specious artifice. The evils of sectarianism were ob- 
vious and confessed. The division of Protestant Chris- 
tendom into numerous rival sects, spending their 
time, wasting their energies, embittering their spirits, 
and affording sport for their adversaries, by their sub- 
tle and profitless controversies, has long been its re- 
proach, its curse, and its blight. It is an evil second 
in magnitude only to the religious uniformity, which, 
resembling the quiet of the cemetery, is the off- 
spring of bigoted and intolerant despotism. Of 
course, in these remarks, reference is had to the 
evils growing out of the condition of the Christian 
world. The mischiefs of sectarianism were delinea- 
ted by Mr. Campbell, certainly, with no fear of ex- 
aggeration. All its legitimate evils were charged 
upon it ; and many v/hich with equal plausibility 
might have been ascribed to other causes. From 
all these evils he promised a certain and speedy de- 
liverance. The ^^ ancient Gospel,'' or the Gospel 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FOKMATION. 79 

as expounded at Bethany^ was a remedy for all 
these disorders. The plan of relief was perfectly 
simple. Nothing was necessary to abolish sectarian- 
ism, and its bitter fruits, and so secure the perfect 
union of all Christians, but the belief of one fact — 
that Jesus is the Messiah ; submission to one insti- 
tution — immersion, for the remission of sins ; and a 
steady conformity to ihQ apostles' doctrine. The 
scheme was defective, visionary, and utterly ineffi- 
cacious ; but it was plausible — it promised relief 
from evils seen, felt and lamented — it seemed to be 
the only prospect for relief presented — and many, 
cheated by the illusion, gladly embraced it. 

Another cause which favored the progress of the 
reformation was the prevalence of hyper-Calvinistic, 
or antinomian views in many Baptist churches. 
Having adopted, in its main points, the Calvinian 
theology, they were led by their system into specu- 
lations as unpopular as they were sterile. To free 
them from objections and render them acceptable 
to their auditors, the pastors spent a large portion 
of the time devoted to pulpit labors in their discus- 
sion ; and what occupied so much of their thought 
grew into most exaggerated importance in their es- 
timation. They seemed to think that they were 
called to the ministry for no other purpose than to 
proclaim and vindicate a few abstruse and barren 
points of the Calvinistic creed ; but their ministry, 
excepting to a fe\^ indoctrinated zealots, was not 



80 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATIOK. 

pleasing. The people generally becoming disgusted 
with such dry^ and unsatisfying speculations, were 
ready to attend on any ministry which promised 
them a more palatable, if not a more nutritious diet. 
In churches of this sort Mr. Campbell found his way 
prepared before him. 

His opposition to Christian missions, and other 
benevolent enterprizes, gained him many friends. 
The antinomian Baptists were, almost without ex- 
ception, hostile to all combined and self-denying 
efforts among Christians for spreading the know- 
ledge of the Grospel — a hostility derived, in part, 
from their peculiar doctrinal opinions, and, it seems 
not uncharitable to judge, in part, from their 
covetousness. They were delighted to find that 
they had in Mr. Campbell, a champion in their 
cause, so zealous and distinguished ; and, though 
their doctrinal sentiments were antipodal to his, yet 
this agreement on a very important point, as they 
deemed it, disposed them to pass the most favor- 
able judgment on him, and his system. Nor was 
this pleasure limited to antinomian Baptists. Mr. 
Campbell's ridicule of missions, and kindred efforts, 
was too much in harmony with the selfishness of 
human nature, and the money-loving propensity of 
the age, not to awaken sympathy, and call forth ad- 
miration. An intelligent correspondent of the 
Christian Baptist thus addressed him : '^ My dear 
sir, you have begun wrong, if your object is reform- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 81 

atioii. Never attack the principle whicli multiplies 
the number of Bibles, or which promotes the 
preaching of the Gospel, or the support of it, if 
you desire Christianity to prevail. As I informed 
you when here, I repeat it again, your opposition to 
a preached Gospel, to the preachers and Bible so- 
cieties, secures to you the concurrence of the covet- 
ous, the ignorant, the prayerless and Christless 
Christians. Should they have had any religion, 
they cease to enjoy it as soon as they embrace your 
views/' Chn. Bap., 70. 

Mr. Campbeirs opposition to the clergy had much 
to do with the progress of the Eeformation. Minis- 
ters of the Gospel have in all ages and coun- 
tries, and under all the names by which they have 
been distinguished, had to bear a large share of the 
^^ reproach of Christ.'' Whoever ridicules them, 
throws suspicion on their motives, or, in any way, 
undermines their influence, with whatever pretence, 
is sure to win the smiles, and receive the plaudits 
of a certain class of persons, among whom, it is sad 
to say, may be found professing Christians. Mr. 
Campbell was decidedly politic in his attacks on the 
clergy. While he denounced them, he flattered 
the people. They did not need to hire priests for 
their instruction — they could read and expound the 
Scriptures for themselves — every church had within 
itself the means of its own edification. These sen- 
timents were too congenial to the independence and 

4* 



82 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 

pride of human nature not to find a cordial recep- 
tion. Many who had been content to be learners^ 
after reading a few numbers of the Christian Bap- 
tist^ were elated with the prospect of becoming 
teachers. A Eeformation which promised to sink 
the aristocratic populars and to elevate the masses 
far above their former teachers^ could not fail to se- 
cure the approval and support of those who con- 
fided in its professions. 

I know not how much influence Mr. Campbell's 
teaching derived from its Scotch peculiarities^ but I 
know it derived some. The Scotch are remarkable 
for the tenacity with which they adhere to their re- 
ligious opinions. A Scotchman of my acquaint- 
ance, an intelligent and worthy man — finding that 
Mr. Camf)bell agreed with him in certain unim- 
portant^ but cherished opinions, in regard to which 
he differed from his brethren generally, was induced 
to pay a favorable attention to the ^^ ancient Gos- 
pel/' and finally to become its earnest advocate. 

The chief means of spreading the peculiar views 
of the Bethany Reformer was the Christian Baptist, 
— a small, cheap periodical, whose circulation was 
constantly increasing. To their development and 
defense its pages were exclusively devoted. Almost 
all who read it were either disgusted with its spirit 
and sentiments, and spurned it from them, or being 
gradually brought under its influence, at length, 
enlisted under the banner of the Reformation. Mr, 



CAMPBELLIS]\I IN ITS FORMATION. 83 

Campbell, in addition to his editorial, and other 
literary labors, frequently made long tours in Vir- 
ginia, Kentucky and Ohio, every where proclaiming 
to crowded assemblies the principles of hisKeforma- 
tion. His sermons, or ^^ orations,'' as he styled 
them, long, and sometimes tedious, were heard by 
some with disapprobation, by others with serious 
doubts as to their usefulness, and by others still 
with indifference ; yet, on the whole, thej^ contrib- 
uted much to diffuse the knowledge of his prin- 
ciples, promote the circulation of his periodical, and 
multiply the number of his friends. 

Nor must it be forgotten in enumerating the 
causes which facilitated the progress of the Reform- 
ation, that Mr. Campbell taught many important 
truths ; exposed some serious evils ; furnished some 
striking expositions of Scripture passages, which. 
If not original, were new to his hearers ; and labored 
diligently to awaken an interest in the study of the 
Scriptures. 

It has been already stated that it was not Mr. 
Campbell's purpose — certainly not his avowed pur- 
pose — to form a new sect, but to abolish all sects. 
If he did not perceive, he was the only intelligent 
observer of his course who did not perceive, its direct 
and inevitable tendency to produce that result. 
His spirit was eminently sectarian. What is sect- 
arianism, but an undue confidence in the soundness 
of our views of Scripture truth, an excessive partial- 



84 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 

ity for the party concurring with lis in these views, 
and the lack of candor, tenderness, and forbearance 
towards those who dissent from them ? When tried 
by this standard, no enlightened and unbiased 
reader of the Christian Baj)tisf can doubt that Mr. 
Campbeirs sectarianism was unmitigated. Within 
the wide ran2:e of Christian literature there cannot 
be found a work more intolerant, proscriptive, and 
caustic. Love is the very soul of piety, and the 
moving principle in every v^ell-directed effort at 
reformation ; and this principle will develop itself 
in gentle words, candid admissions, and a duo 
regard to the feelings and motives of opponents, as 
well as in a faithful, earnest exhibition of divine 
truth. If Mr. CampbelFs object was to avoid the 
formation of a new sect, his course was most im- 
politic. Instead of commending what was" good, 
enduring minor evils, and kindly seeking to correct 
the serious errors in the different Christian sects ; he 
censured their views and practices with little discri- 
mination, and unsparing causticity, proclaiming that 
they were all in Babylon, and their religion not much 
better than paganism ; and justified his severity by 
the example of Luther in contending against the 
Papists, and of Christ in condemning the Scribes 
and Pharisees. Never did any leader more per- 
fectly succeed in infusing his own spirit into his 
followers, than did Mr. Campbell. With not a tithe 
of his genius, learning, or information, they did not 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 85 

yield to him a liair-breadth, in the strength of their 
conviction^ that their new religious views were 
Scriptural. Many of them were almost in an 
ecstacy that having been so long in the darkness 
of Babylon, a light, so effulgent and vivifying, 
should have suddenly shined upon them. A shadow 
of suspicion that, after all, they might misinterpret 
the Scriptures seemed never to have darkened their 
minds. A fact may serve to illustrate their spirit. 
A girl of my acquaintance, still in her teens, quite 
illiterate, and possessing no uncommon genius, had 
been immersed for the remission of sins. On meet- 
ing her, I found that she had entered fully into the 
spirit of the Keformation. I inquired of her, whether 
she was satisfied that her new views were correct. 
She replied, ^^ I can't be wrong — I follow the Book.'' 
I answered, ^^ I acknowledge that the Bible is an 
infallible guide; but I am not quite certain that you 
are an infallible interpreter of it." Our conversa- 
tion was continued for some time, and I could not, 
by any argument or appeal, extort from her the 
confession that she might possibly misinterpret the 
Scriptures. ^^ I follow the Book, and can't be 
deceived," was her unchanged reply. I remember 
a similar case. A Reformer invited me to his house 
for the ostensible purpose of seeing his sick wife, 
but for the real purpose, as it appeared, of affording 
me an opportunity of learning the principles of the 
Beformation. He could not read, but had a young 



86 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 

daughter^ who entered fully into his spirit and views, 
that was more fortunate in this respect, than her 
father. The Keformer called on his daughter to 
read certain portions of Scripture v/hich had been 
selected for the occasion, and she complied with an 
air and manner which indicated how deeply she 
thought I was indebted for her kindness. He then 
commenced an oration, to which I listened without 
reply, and without a smile, though I found it diffi- 
cult to maintain my gravity, until, my edification 
having ceased, I abruptly took my leave. I should 
not deem it proper to mention these particular cases, 
were I not satisfied that all acquainted with the 
early history of Campbellism will perceive in them 
life-like portraitures of many, not all — for some 
Avere modest, courteous, and dignified — of the prim- 
itive Eeformers. I greatly misjudge if the early 
disciples of Mr. Campbell, (I do not use the phrase 
opprobriously,) were not, for the most part, restive, 
contentious, and factious. How could they be other- 
wise ? They read the Christian Baptist, had strong 
confidence in the wisdom and piety of its editor, 
imbibed its spirit, adopted its principles, clothed 
themselves with the armor which it furnished, entered 
heartily into all the schemes which it advocated foi 
the destruction of creeds, the overthrow of the clergy, 
the arrest of benevolent operations, and, in short, 
the '^ restoration of the ancient order of things'' set 
up, or brought to light at Bethany ; and aimed to 



CAMPBELLISM IlN ITS rOR:.IATION. 87 

approve themselves worthy followers of an illustrious 
and undaunted leader. 

The Baptists^ at least in Virginia, were unpre- 
pared for the conflict which came upon them. Their 
pastors, mostly plain men, with limited education, 
and earnest piety, had restricted their public instruc- 
tions to the fundamental principles of Christianity, 
and were unfitted by their lack of early training, 
and by their confirmed habits, for polemic discus- 
sions. The members of the churches had inherited 
their religious opinions from the fathers of an earlier 
period, and held them sincerely without a suspicion 
that they could be controverted. They received the 
Bible in the common version, as their creed, and 
read it, mainly to be comforted by its promises, and 
guided by its precepts, not doubting that all their 
doctrinal views were clearlv contained in it. It were 
useless to maintain that the Baptists were faultless 
in the controversy. They sinned far less than they 
were sinned against, but they were not without sin. 
They sometimes judged when they should have 
investigated, condemned when they should have 
debated, resorted to the exercise of authority when 
they should have used kind persuasion, and failed 
to distinguish between the factious and the misled. 
In the year 1832, events were drawing to a crisis 
in the Baptist denomination in Virginia and some 
of the Western States. A party had been foimed 
in the churches, respectable for their number, and 



88 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 

quite formidable by the aggressive spirit which 
actuated them. They adopted the peculiar senti- 
ments and practices advocated by Mr. Campbell in 
the Christian Baptist^ and its successor^ the Millen- 
nial Harbinger. They styled themselves Reformers^ 
but by their opponents^ they were styled Camphell- 
ites. They were exceedingly active in making con- 
verts^ and in numbering and marshalling their 
forces. In this state of things it was impossible but 
that strife^ irritations, alienations, and divisions must 
ensue. Mr. Campbell had for several years been 
sowing the seed of sectarianism, and now he was 
about to reap the harvest. 

What was to be done in this crisis ? The Ee- 
formers, with Mr. Campbell at their head, were 
violently opposed to separation from the Baptists, 
and were ready, to a man, to fight for peace. It 
can hardly be doubted that this desire of union 
sprang from policy rather than love, They were 
willing to remain for a time in Babylon, that they 
might extricate others from its smoke, vassalage, 
and degradation. Knowing themselves to be in a 
hopeless minority, they were desirous to be permitted 
to avail themselves of Baptist pulpits and presses 
for the propagation of their principles. But a 
division was inevitable. It existed in fact — a divi- 
sion in sentiment, affection, interest, and aim — and 
it only remained to be carried out in form. 

Had the churches a right to expel the Reformers ? 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 89 

The power of expelling factious and disorderly mem- 
bers seems to be indispensable to the purity^ peace, 
and prosperity of the churches, and this power is 
distinctly conferred in the Scriptures. '^ Now, I 
beseech you, brethren, mark them wdiich cause divi- 
sions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye 
have learned ; and avoid them.'' Eom xvi. 27. It 
is true, the Eeformers maintained that their teach- 
ings and efforts were in harmony with the apostolic 
doctrine — indeed, that their chief object was to 
restore that long- lost doctrine — but Christ had 
solemnly devolved on the churches to which the 
innovators belonged, the duty of deciding these 
points. Their decision might be wise or unwise — - 
might be dictated by sectarian bigotry, or an honest 
and enlightened regard to truth — but on them de- 
volved, by divine appointment, the duty and respon- 
sibility of making it ; and from their decision there 
was, according to their established polity — a polity 
approved by the Eeformers — no appeal. That 
there are occasions which call for the exercise of 
this right on the part of churches, none can deny. 
Members may adopt principles so utterly at war 
with the Gospel, evince a spirit so repugnant to the 
spirit of Christ, and pursue a course so manifestly 
factious and schismatic, as to leave no doubt of the 
propriety of their expulsion from church fellowship. 
Whether the churches should exercise their au- 
thority in putting the Eeformers out of their commu- 



90 CAMPBELLISM IX ITS FORMATION. 

nion, was a question environed with difficulties — a 
question involving alike the rights of individuals 
and of churches — the maintenance of truth and 
order — and the prosperity of the Eedeemer's cause. 
There were grave and weighty reasons against the 
separation. A schism in the churches was greatly 
to be deprecated. Many of the Eeformers were good 
men — converted and trained up among the Baptists 
— adopting Mr. Campbeirs views only in part, and 
imbibing his spirit in widely different measures — 
from whom it was painful to separate. A division 
could not take place without giving rise to perplex- 
ing questions concerning the right of property, and 
greatly increasing the strife and irritation already 
prevailing, to the mortification of the godly, and the 
reproach of Christianity. To these considerations 
must be added, that however sound the reasons for 
their exclusion, the Eeformers would not fail, by the 
cry of persecution, to enlist the sympathies of a partjr 
in their favor, and to bring odium on their opposers. 
On the other hand, the reasons for a separation were 
overwhelming. In many churches, the parties had 
taken their grounds, and in the constant, earnest, 
and painful strife about the Eeformation, the true 
ends of church fellowship were almost forgotten. 
TheEeformed ministers were zealous in disseminating 
their principles in all the churches to which they 
could gain access, and baptizing into their new faith 
such converts as they could find or make, not only 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 91 

in their own congregations^ but in those of non- 
Reforming pastors. Meetings of the Keformers were 
called and held to promote the interests of the 
Reformation. With this Reformation the Baptists 
had no sympathy, believing it to be pugnacious in 
spirit, unsound in theory, and barren in the fruits 
of piety. It was utterly impossible that parties, so 
discordant in views, so alienated in affection, and of 
such opposite aims, should dwell together in unity. 
To perpetuate the union, under such circumstances, 
was to perpetuate strife, and heart-burnings, and 
entail on the churches inefficiency and ruin. More- 
over, the principles advocated by the Reformers, 
were deemed by the Baptists to be, not only erro- 
neous, but of pernicious influence, and such as they 
could not countenance without recreancy to the 
cause of Christ. 

It is not proposed to furnish a history of the 
painful separation which took place between the 
Reformers and Baptists in several of the Southern, 
and most of the Western States. The details of 
the event would fill a large volume. Every asso- 
ciation and every church infected with Campbellism 
has its peculiar history. The conflict was, in many 
respects, everywhere the same — maintained with the 
same spirit, carried on with the same weapons, and 
producing the same results, differing, however, 
widely in degree — its details being in no two places 
the same. Here the hottest contest was in the 



92 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS F OFJi ATIOIST. 

association — there in the churches ; here the Bap- 
tists were in the majority, ejecting the Keformers, 
and retaining possession of the property — there the 
Eeformers were in the ascendant, and the Baptists 
under the necessity of relinquishing their interest in 
the property, and w^ithdrawing from the communion 
of the Eeformers ; here the battle was fierce, and 
the separation was attended with painful exaspera- 
tion — there mild counsel prevailed, and the division 
occurred in a gentler and more forbearing spirit. 

As a specimen of the course pursued by other 
bodies, I will give a sketch of the action of the 
Dover Association — -then the largest association of 
Baptists in the world — in regard to Campbellism ; 
and I select this because I happen to be best 
acquainted with it. In the autumn of 1832, this 
body convened at Four-Mile Creek meeting-house, 
in Henrico Countv, Va., not far from the citv of 
Eichmond. The Eeformation excitement had reach- 
ed its height. Several of the churches belonging to 
the body had been split asunder, and others were 
in a distracted and unhappy condition. All eyes 
were- turned to the Association for advice in this 
time of trial. The judicious and venerable E. B. 
Semple, so long the Moderator of the Association, 
was absent, having recently been called to his reward. 
The subject which had caused such painful anxiety, 
was referred to a select committee, consisting of 
Elders John Kerr, James B. Taylor, Peter Ainslie, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 93 

J. B. Jeter, and Philip Montague. The committee 
in due time made the following report : 

'^ The select committee appointed to consider and 
report ' what ought to be done in reference to the 
new doctrines and practices which have disturbed 
the peace and harmony of some of the churches 
composing this association/ met at the house of 
Elder Miles Turpin^ and having invited and 
obtained the aid and counsel of Elders Andrew 
Broaddus, Eli Ball, John Micou, William Hill^ 
Miles Turpin, and brother Erastus T. Montague, 
after due deliberation, respectfully report the fol- 
lowing preamble and resolution for the considera- 
tion and adoption of the association. 

'' This association having been from its origin, 
blessed with uninterrupted harmony, and a high 
degree of religious prosperity, has seen with un- 
speakable regret, within a few years past, the spirit 
of speculation, controversy and strife, growing up 
among some of the ministers and churches within 
its bounds. This unhappy state of things has evi- 
dently been produced by the preaching, and writ- 
ings of Alexander Campbell, and his adherents. 
After having deliberately and prayerfully examined 
the doctrines held, and propagated by them, and 
waited long to witness their practical influence on 
the churches, and upon society in general, we are 
thoroughly convinced that they are doctrines not ac- 
cording to godhness, but subversive of the true 



94 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATIOK. 

spirit of the Gospel of Jesus Christ — disorganizing 
and demoralizing in their tendency ; and^ therefore, 
ought to be disavowed and resisted, by all the 
lovers of truth and sound piety. 

^^It is needless to specify, and refute the errors 
held and taught by them ; this has been often done, 
and as often have the doctrines, quoted from their 
writings, been denied, with the declaration that they 
have been misrepresented or misunderstood. If 
after more than seven years' investigation, the most 
pious and intelligent men in the land are unable to 
understand what thev speak and write, it surely is 
an evidence of some radical defect in the things 
taught, or in the mode of teaching them. Their 
views of sin, faith, repentance, regeneration, bap- 
tism, the agency of the Holy Spirit, church govern- 
ment, the Christian ministry, and the whole scheme 
of Christian benevolence, are, w^e believe, contrary 
to the plain letter and spirit of the New Testament 
of our Lord and Saviour. 

'^ By their practical influence, churches long bless- 
ed with peace and prosperity, have been thrown into 
wrangling and discord — principles long held sacred 
by the best and most enlightened men that ever 
lived or died, are villified and ridiculed as ^ school 
divinity,' ' sectarian dogmas,' &c. Ministers, who 
have counted all things but loss, for the excellency 
of the knowledge of Christ Jesus, are reprobated, 
and denounced as Sdsionary dreamers,' ^mysti- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 95 

fiers/ ^ blind leaders of the blind/ ^ hireling 
priests/ (fee, &c. The church in which many of 
them live^ and from which they call it persecution 
to be separated, is held up to public scorn as 
^ Babylon the mother of harlots, and abominations 
of the earth/ The most opprobrious epithets are 
unsparingly applied to principles which we think 
clearly taught in the Word of God, and which we 
hold dear to our hearts. While they arrogate to 
themselves the title of ^ Eeformers/ it is lament- 
ably evident, that no sect in Christendom needs re- 
formation more than they do. 

" While they boast of superior light and know- 
ledge, we cannot but lament, in their life and con- 
versation, the absence of that ^ wisdom that is from 
above, which is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, 
and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good 
fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy." 
In fine, the writings of Alexander Campbell, and 
the spirit and manner of those who profess to 
admire his writings and sentiments, appear to us 
remarkably destitute of ^ the mind that was in 
Christ Jesus,' of that divine love ' which suff'ereth 
long, and is kind, envieth not, vaunteth not itself, 
is not puff'ed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, 
seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, think- 
eth no evil.' AVherever these writings and senti- 
ments have to any extent, been introduced into our 
churches, the spirit of hypercriticism, ' vain jang- 



96 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS F0RMATI01n\ 

lings and strife about v/ords to no iDrofit^ but to tli6 
subverting of the bearers/ have chilled the spirit 
of true devotion^ and put an end to Christian be- 
nevolence and harmony. 

'^ If the opprobrious epithet s^ and bitter denunci- 
ations, so liberally heaped upon us by Mr. Camp- 
bell and his followers^ are deserved^ they as pious 
and honorable men can not desire to live in commu* 
nion with us ; and if they are undeserved, and de- 
signedly slanderous, this of itself would forbid our 
holding them in Christian fellowship. If, indeed, 
they have found the long lost key of knowledge, 
and are the only persons, since the days of the 
apostles, who have entered and explored the divine 
arcanum, it is due to themselves — to purblind 
Christendom — to the world— to truth — to God, that 
they should, in obedience to the divine command, 
clothed in the shining garments of truth and right- 
eousness^ walk out of ^ Babylon,^ and concentrating 
their light, exhibit a true sample of the ' ancient 
order of things / and diffuse around them a blaze 
of 4ove, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, 
goodness, faith, meekness, temperance.' Until 
they do this, grave and thinking men will doubt 
their high pretentions, for ^by their fruits ye 
shall know them.' It would seem that conscientious, 
unobtrusive, holy men, whose hearts are sickened 
with the depravity of the times, and who mourn a 
sad and general departure from truth and holiness, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 97 

would voluntarily come out from ^ the present cor- 
rupt order of things/ and holding sweet commu- 
nion with one another, and with their God, let their 
light so shine that others seeing their good works, 
might be induced to glorify their Father in heaven ; 
but, alas ! they appear to be a strange anti-secta- 
rian, dogmatical sect, who live only in the fire of 
strife and controversy, and seek to remain in con- 
nexion with the existing churches, that they may 
with the greater facility obtain materials for feeding 
the disastrous flame. 

^^In every aspect of the case then, a separation is 
indispensably necessary. The cause of truth and 
righteousness requires it — the best interests of all 
the parties concerned demand it. 

^^ We, therefore, the assembled ministers, and dele^ 
gates of the Dover Association, after much prayer^ 
ful dehberation, do hereby affectionately recommend 
to the churches in our connection, to separate from 
their communion all such persons as are promoting 
controversy and discord, under the specious name 
of ' Keformers.' That the line of distinction may 
be clearly drawn, so that all who are concerned may 
understand it, we feel it our duty to declare, that 
wtiereas Peter Ainslie, John Du Val, Mathew W. 
Webber, Thos. M. Henley, John Eichards, and 
Dudley Atkinson, ministers within the bounds of 
this Association, have voluntarily assumed the name 
of ' Eeformers,' in its party application, by attend- 



98 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMAl^ION. 

ing a meeting publicly advertised for that party ; 
and by communing with^ and otherwise promoting 
the views of the members of that party, who have 
been separated from the fellowship and communion 
of regular Baptist churches- — therefore 

"^ Besolved, That this Association cannot consist- 
ently, and conscientiously receive them, nor any 
other ministers maintaining their views, as members 
of their body ; nor can they in future act in concert 
with any church, or churches, that may encourage 
or countenance their ministrations/^ 

This preamble and resolution, prepared by Elder 
John Kerr, pastor of the First Baptist church in 
the city of Richmond, was approved by all the mem- 
bers of the committee, excepting Mr. Ainslie, who 
was a Reformed preacher, and named among those, 
whose excision vms proposed by the report, and 
also by all the brethren whose counsel was sought 
by the committee. The report was adopted by the 
association, without discussion, and with few dis- 
sentients. The delegates had been selected and 
sent to the meeting for the purpose of adopting, if 
practicable, effective measures for allaying the per- 
nicious excitement in the churches^ and were pre- 
pared to act promptly and decidedly. Their action, 
whether wise or unwise, was adopted after careful 
deliberation, earnest prayer for divine guidance, and 
with much anxiety for its result, and it received the 
cordial approbation of the churches. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 99 

It was not to be expected that the decision of the 
association would be acceptable to Mr. Campbell^ 
and the Eeformers. They viewed themselves as the 
objects of a most unchristian and cruel persecution. 
Mr. Campbell stigmatized the report^ adopted by 
the association^ as the ^' Dover Decree/' and thus 
discoursed of it in the Millennial Harbinger^ Vol. 
3^ page 573. 

'^ What a dangerous matter it has become^ to 
think differently from Messrs. Kerr^ Ball^ Broaddus, 
and Erastus Montague ! How perilous to view sin^ 
faith, baptism, &c., differently from these ' keepers 
of the faith' of Virginia. This alone exposes a per- 
son to the greatest anathema in the power of Vir- 
ginia Baptists. They can do no more in Virginia, 
as yet, than treat a dissentient as they would a 
murderer, or a vile adulterer. The committee or 
managers of the hull of excommunication, can neither 
banish, burn, nor imprison those who differ from 
their views of sin, faith, and baptism. There is no 
Patmos, jail, or pillory known in Virginia law, for 
those who think differently from John Kerr or Eli 
Ball. But they can place Peter Ainslie, John Du 
Val, M. B. Webber, T. M. Henley, John Eichards, 
and Dudley Atkinson in the same society, as re- 
spects the Lord's table, with all the inmates of the 
penitentiary, now under the care of my friend Col. 
C. S. Morgan ; yes, they can tell all the sects in 
Virginia, that they view these virtuous and exem- 



100 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 

plary men as unfit for the communion of Eli Ball 
and John Kerr^ as were the infamous actors in the 
Southampton insurrection. We ask what difference 
have they made ? What more could they do than 
exclude such from the kingdom of heaven ? and do 
they not teach that the kingdom of heaven is theirs ? 
If they think that what they have bound on earth 
is bound in heaven, where stand these anathema- 
tized preachers ? Are they blotted out of the book 
of life ? But perhaps they will say, that what they 
have loosed on earth in the house of Miles Turpin, 
is not loosed in heaven ! Nor can they pray to the 
Lord to ratify in heaven what they have done on 
earth ! What a farce this is ! And how will they 
answer to the Lord for casting out of his church on 
earth (as they call the Dover Association) those 
whom they have every reason to think are esteemed 
as much the children of God as themselves ?'' 

Many other things of like spirit and quality did 
Mr. Campbell pen and publish ; and his adherents 
echoed and re-echoed his denunciations of the Dover 
Association, with most vehement zeal. Had they been 
fined, imprisoned, scourged, outlawed, branded, and 
exposed to a terrible martyrdom, they could not have 
made a greater outcry against their shameless and 
cruel persecutions, than they did for being put out of 
the communion of churches, which, in the ardor of 
their zeal forReformation,they had often pronounced 
to be priest-ridden, corrupt, and in Babylon. They 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 101 

gloried in being, as they supposed^ martyrs in tlie 
cause of truth and righteousness. Thus writes one 
of the excinded preachers — 

^' The long agony is over. The Dover Association 
has assumed the awful responsibility of producing a 
faction ; consequently, a sect. We feel much re- 
lieved as respects ourselves. Only three or four of 
the Eeformers attended the Association, as we had 
no objection to being a separate people, if the Bap- 
tists were resolved on taking to themselves this act 
of rebellion against Jesus Christ our Lord. I ven- 
ture to say, no intelligent friend of Reform is dis- 
pleased with it. For myself ^ I feel highly honored 
in being made the first martyr in old Virginia in 
the present Reformation, My Christian character 
has been gibbeted (though yet I live) for adhering 
to the sayings and doings of Jesus Christ and his 
apostles. Philip Montague has conferred this honor 
upon me. It is the highest I ever expect to enjoy 
in time — worth all the D.D.'s that ever were issued 
from all the seminaries in the world.'' Mill. Har., 
vol. 4, p. 13. 

More than twenty years have passed since the 
Dover Association adopted the report of its com- 
mittee condemning Campbellism. Let us now 
endeavor to take a calm and candid review of the 
measure. The report contained some unguarded 
and unnecessarily harsh expressions. Its author, 
whose temperament was naturally ardent, had been 



102 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 

greatly annoyed and excited by the prevalence of 
Mr. Campbeirs peculiar views in the church, of 
which he was pastor^ and the secession of a large 
and respectable party adopting them^ from the main 
body. The report was evidently written under the 
influence of this excitement ; and the committee 
and the Association partook too much of the same 
feeling, to scan the document with severity. The 
doctrines taught by Mr. Campbell were declared to 
be '^ demoralizing in their tendency ;'' and of the 
party embracing them, it was affirmed that " no sect 
in Christendom needed reformation more than they.^' 
On calm reflection, these expressions were generally 
admitted to be unjust. "Whatever may be the ulti- 
mate influence of Campbelhsm on piety and morals^ 
it must be conceded, that it gives no countenance 
to immorality. And while it can hardly be denied 
that the party embracing the system needed reforma- 
tion, it is but fair to admit that there are Christian 
sects which need it '^ more than they.'' These ex- 
pressions were subsequently expunged or modified 
by the Association. The amiable and clear-headed 
Moderator of the Association, the Eev. A. Broaddus, 
who undertook the vindication of the report from 
what he deemed the "" unfair representation'' of it 
by Mr. Campbell, made the following admission — 

'^ In the report of the committee, (drafted by the 
chairman) there are some few expressions w^hich, in 
my view, might have been advantageously omitted, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 103 

or exchanged for others ; the instrument might thus 
have retained all its force^ without any tinge of 
acrimony or harshness/' 

Let us now examine the other side of the case. 
Mr. Campbell and his friends maintained that the 
Association in its action not only transgressed the 
law of Christy infringed the religious liberty of indi- 
viduals^ and were guilty of flagrant persecution^ but 
plainly transcended its constitutional authority. It 
had no right^ it must be conceded^ to interfere in 
the government or discipline of the churches. It 
was simply an advisory council. It possessed the 
unquestioned and unquestionable right of advising 
the churches in all matters pertaining to their peace 
and prosperity. This right the members of the 
Association exercised^ in an important matter^ to 
the best of their judgment^ and at the earnest re- 
quest of the churches. They did not counsel hastily, 
nor without deliberation^ nor without a deep sense 
of their responsibility to Christy nor without prayer 
for divine guidance. Their advice was in the follow- 
ing words — ^^ We^ therefore, the assembled minis- 
ters and delegates, of the Dover Association, after 
much prayerful deliberation, do hereby affectionately 
recommend to the churches in our connection, to 
separate from their communion, all such persons as 
are promoting controversy and discord, under the 
specious name of Eeformers.'' They might err in 
the counsel which they gave, but so might their 



104 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 

Opponents in judging of it. The churches might 
receive or reject their advice at pleasure. The 
Association had no power to enforce its counsel, 
except moral power. Thus far its action certainly 
did not exceed the limit of its admitted authority. 
But the ministers and delegates of the Association 
declared that they could not ^^consistently and con- 
scientiously receive''' certain individuals named, ^^ or 
any other ministers maintaiDing their views, as mem- 
bers of their body.'' The Association had the admit- 
ted authority, for such reasons as they deemed valid, 
to expel a church from the body. In naming certain 
ministers, with whom in future they could not con- 
sent to co-operate, they did not exclude them from the 
churches of which they were respectively members, 
nor interfere with the discipline of those churches ; 
but simply announced to the churches, that believ- 
ing these ministers to be unsound in doctrine, and 
their labors and injiuence subversive of the harmony 
and prosperity of the churches, they would exercise 
their constitutional authority in excluding from their 
fellowship such churches as should continue to 
'' countenance their ministrations." The design of 
the Association was to draw clearly ^^'a line of dis- 
tinction" between themselves and the Reformers ; 
and the measure adopted was admirably suited to 
secure the object. In a very short time, and with 
less irritation than for several years had been exist- 
ing, the parties were clearly separated. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 105 

It is proper to permit Kev. A. Broaddus, the 
most logical and formidable of Mr. Campbell's op- 
ponents^ and one of the mildest and most courteous 
of controversialists, to vindicate the action of the 
Association, from the unfair representations, and 
severe animadversions contained in the Millennial 
Harbinger. 

'^ But to the more particular object of this com- 
munication — the light in which Mr. Campbell has 
endeavored to place the conduct of the Association, 
in adopting this measure. Let us hear him. ' They 
can do nothing more in Virginia, as yet, than treat 
a dissentient as they would a murderer or a vile 
adulterer. The committee, or managers of the hull 
of excommunication, can neither banish, burn, nor 
imprison those who differ from their views of sin, 
faith, and baptism. There is no Patmos, jail, or 
pillory, known in Virginia law, for those who think 
differently,' &c. 

^^Now, I really should wonder, if it were not that 
something similar had been intimated at other 
times — I really should w^onder — ^yea, and still I 
cannot help wondering — that Mr. Campbell did not 
think this beneath him ! this politic resort — this 
most unfair and injurious attempt to enlist the 
prejudices of his readers against the Association, by 
charging them, as he obviously does, by implication, 
with a disposition to persecute those who differ from 
them ; — to persecute them even to imprisonment, 



106 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 

to exile, and to death ; — restrained only by the want 
of power from inflicting these punishments ! Such 
is the construction which every candid and intelli- 
gent reader must put on his expressions ; and on 
every candid and intelligent reader, I now call, to 
judge of the force and validity of this charge. 

'' What is the ground of this charge ? Why, the 
Association has cut off ' these virtuous and exem- 
plary men' from fellowship in our body : ergOj the 
Association would imprison, banish, or burn them, 
if the power were not wanting ! This then is the 
position which arises from such reasoning : — A de- 
claration of non-fellowship is suflScient proof of a 
disposition to imprison, banish or kill ! This, I say, 
is the position resulting from a charge established on 
such ground ; and on the same ground, no ingenuity 
of man can fairly make out, how the act of exclusion 
can be performed by a church, without incurring 
the same charge. The principle assumed is the 
same in every case, and thus, when we exclude 
from fellowship, we do of course give evidence of a 
disposition to imprison, to banish, to burn ; and 
then, to sanction exclusion from fellowship, is, in 
effect, to sanction the popish excommunication, — 
where the thunders of the Vatican are hurled at the 
head of the devoted victim, and temporal pains and 
punishments are inflicted on him. 

'' But I have one more argument on this case — the 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 107 

argumenticm ad liominem — or an argument applying 
to the assailant's own views. Keader, attend ! 

'' Let us view the charge against the Association. 
They have gone as far as they could go. "What 
then ? Why, they would go much farther, it seems, 
if they had power. ' The committee, or managers 
of the hull of excommunication, can neither banish, 
burn, nor imprison those who differ from their views 
of sin, faith, and baptism :' which amounts to this : 
The Dover Association has passed a resolution of 
non-fellowship with the people called ^ Eeformers / 
and therefore would imprison, banish or burn them, 
if they had the power. Now, mark well, I beseech 
you, reader, and see if the argument does not come 
home to Mr. Campbell in all its force. Mr. Campbell 
(be it remembered) is not an open communionist. 
Vv^ell ; Mr. Campbell passed a resolution of non- 
fellowship wdth all Pa3do-baptists : he has gone as 
far as he can ; -and therefore — what shall I say ? — 
he has given evidence that he would imprison, 
banish, or burn them, if he had the power. ^ But 
I don't believe it,' you say. Neither do I ; — far 
from it ! But is not the argumentum ad hominem 
fairly applied ? What a pity it is that my friend 
could not have had charity enough to believe the 
committee, or the Association, might declare non- 
fellowship with people, whom they would neither 
burn, banish, nor imprison ; nor indeed injure in 
any way whatever.'' 



108 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 

It is but justice to Mr. Campbell to note that in 
replying to this spirited vindicMion of the exscind- 
ing act of the Association^ (of which only a part has 
been quoted^) he felt constrained to disavow the 
consequence so logically deduced by Mr. Broaddus 
from the expressions in the Millennial Harbinger. 
^^In one word/' said he^ '^I do not think that any 
of the Virginia Baptists would burn myself or breth- 
ren ; but unless they would burn^ or banish^ or 
otherwise inflict civil penalties upon us^ what more 
can they do than what they have done ?'' And^ it 
may be asked, with equal pertinency, believing that 
the peace and prosperity of the churches demanded 
the exclusion of the Eeformers from their fellowship, 
what less could they have done than they did do ? 
They condemned the principles, and deplored the 
mischievous effects of the so-called ^^'Eeforma- 
tion/^ and aimed, with as little irritation as possible, 
to produce the desired separation ; but carefully 
abstained from any imputation on the moral char- 
acter of the Eeformers. If a few unguarded and 
acrimonious expressions escaped them, they might 
surely find an apology, if not a justification, in '4he 
spirit that breathes, and words that burn'' in the 
pages of the Christian Baptist and Millennial Har- 
binger. 

Not long since a member was excluded from a 
Baptist church. He was a man of irreproachable 
moral character, but, having become a Sjnritualisf^ 



CA.MPBELLISM IN ITS FOEMATION. 109 

as the believers in spirit rappings are called, lie de- 
nied the inspiration of the Scriptures, human de- 
pravity, the divinity and atonement of Christ — in 
fine, all the distinctive principles of the Gospel. 
He claimed to be judged not by his opinions, but his 
works. ^"^Not opinions, but deeds^' he insisted, 
'^ should be the great test of character.'' Yet, he 
was expelled, and most righteously, from the fellow- 
ship of the church. Now, on the principle adopted 
by Mr. Campbell, this was rank persecution. 
" What a dangerous matter,'' the Spiritualist might 
plausibly, and in the language of Mr. Campbell, 
say, it is '' to think differently from" the church. 
" Liberty, religious liberty, that liberty which alone 
deserves the name, . . . has expired in" it. ^^They 
can do no more . . as yet than treat a dissentient as 
they would a murderer or a vile adulterer. They 
can place ^ me' in the same society, as respects the 
Lord's table, with all the inmates of the peniten- 
tiary ; . . . , yes, they can tell all the sects . . . that 
they view" me, though ^^ virtuous and exemplary, 
. . as unfit for" their ^^ communion as the infamous 
actors in the Southampton insurrection." Mill. 
Har., Vol. 3, p. 573. 

The separation, though painful at first, after- 
wards tended to diminish the evils which had 
sprung from the controversy and strife produced by 
the Eeformation. The parted combatants, finding 
fewer causes of exacerbation, soon began to lose the 



110 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 

heat and violence created by the conflict. The 
Dover Association^ though she lost several churches^ 
and many respectable church members, continued 
her almost unimpeded course of prosperity and use- 
fulness. Her losses were soon repaired ; and even 
in congregations where the Eeformation seemed to 
have acquired the greatest influence, her success 
was not long delayed. Meantime the Eeformers 
enjoyed a privilege which without the separation 
they could not have enjoyed — the privilege of illus- 
trating, by the loveliness of their spirit, the fervor 
of their devotion, the sanctity of their lives, their 
elevation above the world, and the success of their 
ministrations, the superiority of the ^^ ancient Gos- 
per' over sectarian dogmas and mystic theology — 
of the '^ancient order of things'' over the corrup- 
tions of Babylon — in short, the real value of that 
Eeformation, whose pretensions were so lofty, whose 
spirit was so warlike, and whose influence among 
the sects was so exciting and painful. 

Mr. Campbell now found himself at the head of 
a sect — yes, of a sect. The Eeformers were a 
Sect according to the definition of Noah Webster : 
— '' Sect — A body or number of persons united in 
tenets, chiefly in philosophy and religion, but con- 
stituting a distinct party by holding sentiments 
diff'erent from those of other men ; a denomina- 
tion." Did not the Eeformers unite in maintaining 
certain religious tenets ? and were they not dis- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FOEMATION. Ill 

tmguislied by these sentiments from every other 
party ? They were a sect in the Scripture sense 
of the term. The word '^ sect/' or '^ heresy'' as the 
Greek term '•' aiphaiq^'' is rendered in the New- 
Testament, signifies a party, or persons choosing 
and maintaining peculiar opinions. It was among 
the Je^vs, not a term of reproach, but of distinc- 
tion. They called Christians a " sect/' or party ; 
and this sect they knew was every where spoken 
against. Acts 28 : 22. It must be added that the 
Reformers were a ^^ sect" in the sense in which Mr. 
Campbell so frequently employed the term. They 
had all the attributes, and, eminently, the spirit of 
a sect. Their claim to be considered ^^ The GJiurch^'' 
and by eminence '^ The Christian Church^'' was as 
baseless, and far more preposterous, than the same 
claim vauntingly set forth by some older and more 
venerable, if not more worthy, sects. Did Christ 
have no church on earth from the commencement 
of the Eomish apostacy till the beginning of the 
'^ current Reformation ?'' 

Of this sect Mr. Campbell was the head — not by 
appointment, nor in form, but in fact, and by merit. 
His learning, zeal, energy and influence clearly 
marked him out for the position ; and it was ac- 
corded to him without dissent, without envy, heartily, 
and almost unconsciously. The sect was the pro- 
duct of his own labor. It bore strikingly the im- 
press of his own character. Not one among the 



112 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FOEMATION. 

Keformers could encounter him in debate, nor resist 
the weight of his authority, nor add a beam to the 
lio;ht which he shed. His word was the law of the 
Keformation ; and it derived its force from the un- 
wavering conviction among all the Reformers that 
it was in perfect harmony with the Word of God. 
From Maine to Georgia, and from the Atlantic 
coast to the Far West, the same words and phrases 
— ^^a pure speech'' — " the language of Canaan'' — 
were current among them ; and every portion of the 
circulating medium bore the unmistakable impress 
of the Bethany mint. Meet a Reformer, where you 
might, or under whatever circumstances, he would 
soon utter some pecuhar word or phrase which would 
reveal to you, without doubt, his religious opinions, 
and party preference. 

The churches organized, under the influence, and 
by the direction of Mr. Campbell, did not differ 
materially in form and discipline from the Baptist 
churches. Of course, the Babylonish practice of 
hearing experiences before baptism was repudiated ; 
and all persons applying for membership in these 
churches, or who could be persuaded to accept the 
privilege, were received promptly, on professing 
their belief that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, 
and on being immersed for the remission of sins. 
Every church had a plurality of bishops, or elders, 
chosen from its own body ; and its government soon 
passed from the hands of the brotherhood to those 



OAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 113 

of the eldersliip, witli limitations^ into which I need 
not stop to inquire. The churches met for worship 
and edification every Lord's day, even in the most 
sparsely peopled neighborhoods — a practice worthy 
of commendation — and broke bread, or partook of 
the Lord's sujoper, as a part of the instituted wor- 
ship of Christ, at every meeting — a practice, 
which, though neither commanded, nor enforced by 
any clear apostolic example, contravenes no law of 
Christ, and should excite no opposition. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 

It would seem to be impossible for any person 
admitting the inspiration and authority of the Scrip- 
tures^ and drawing his principles from them^ not to 
agree with other Christians in many tenets. It is a 
redeeming quality in Campbellism that it uniformly 
professes a profound respect for the teaching of the 
Bible. Mr. Campbell holds many, and most im- 
portant principles, in common with all Christians. 
Nobly did he vindicate the authenticity and inspira- 
tion of the Scriptures, and the vital principles of 
Christianity, in his debate with Robert Owen, of 
Scotland, the champion of infidelity ; and by that 
service entitled himself to the gratitude and com- 
mendation of the friends of morality and social order. 
Mr. Campbell holds many truths in common with 
all Protestants ; and in his discussion with Bishop 
Purcell, of the Eomish communion, maintained 
them with signal ability, and fully justified his claim 
to be classed among the able defenders of Protest- 
antism. The " Debate on the Soman Catliolic Re- 
ligion'' — a small volume — has not received at the 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 115 

hands of the Protestant public the favor which it 
justly merits. Mr. Campbell embraces some views 
in common with Baptists. Whatever evils he may- 
have done them^ directly and indirectly — and they 
have been neither few nor small — he should have 
due praise for his indefatigable efforts to restore the 
apostolic baptism, or the immersion of believers^, to 
expose the traditionary origin of infant baptism^ and 
to show that the primitive churches were composed 
exclusively of baptized believers. He gave great 
prominence in his teaching to a few principles and 
practices which were deemed important, but not 
particularly insisted on by the ministers of the Bap- 
tist denomination. Several points in regard to 
which he differed from them are of very little mo- 
ment, and would have attracted but slight attention, 
had they not been parts of a system fraught with 
agitation and mischief. Some of the principles em- 
braced by him, and laid at the foundation of his 
Keformation, were not only different from those en- 
tertained by the Baptists, and evangelical Christians 
generally, but were without Scriptural authority. 
Some of these it is proposed particularly to exam- 
ine. No intentional injustice will be done to him 
or his principles. His opponents and reviewers 
have, with perhaps no exception, been accused of 
misrepresenting his views ; and I fear that I may 
subject myself to the same accusation. But, I am 
anxious to diminish rather than widen the breach 



116 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

between the Baptists and the Eeformers. And 
this must be effected^ if eflfected at all, neither by 
exaggeration nor concealing their differences, but 
by a fair, kind, faithful and logical examination of 
them. I design, therefore, to discuss with as much 
care and fullness as the prescribed limits of my trea- 
tise may permit, a few of the distinctive, and most 
objectionable Pi^inciples of Gamphellism, 

The Influence of the Holy Spirit in Con- 
version. 

This subject is* one of vital importance in the 
Christian system. The admission or denial of the 
reality and efficiency of this influence constitutes 
the main difference between evangelical and ration- 
ahstic theology — ^between intelligent living I3iety, 
and heartless, self-sufficient formalism. Almost 
every Christian sect, holding grossly erroneous prin- 
ciples, has included among its errors the denial or 
perversion of the doctrine of the spirit's influence. 
Mr. Campbell in his debate with Eev. N. L. Kice, ad- 
mitted that the subject is ^^of transcendent import- 
ance to the Christian'' — page 611. I would, there- 
fore, enter on its investigation, profoundly conscious 
of my liability to err, and earnestly seeking wisdom 
'^ of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and up- 
braideth not," 

On no subject have the opponents of Mr. Campbell, 
and the Christian public generally, found it so diffi- 
cult to understand and represent his views as on this 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. Il7 

important point. That Mr. Campbell may have full 
justice*, I will make copious extracts on this subject 
from his voluminous works, especially from a '^ Dia- 
logue on the Holy Spirit/' between '' Timothy j' 
representing the doctrine of the Eeformation, and 
'' Ausihi/' a very docile inquirer, on the point of 
embracing the new doctrine, contained in a work 
entitled '^ Christianity Bestored/' issued from the 
Bethany press, in the year 1835. 

^^ It is a moral revolution, a moral reformation, a 
moral change, which is essential to the salvation of 
men. The means therefore must be moral, unless 
we can think that physical causes can produce moral 
effects." p. 346. 

" We have two sorts of power, physical and moral. 
By the former we operate on matter — ^by the latter 
upon mind. To put matter in motion we use 
physical power, whether we call it animal or scien- 
tific power; to put minds in motion we use argu- 
ments, or motives addressed to the reason and na- 
ture of man.'' 

'' Motives are arguments ; and the strength of an 
argument is its power to move. Arguments are 
said to be strong or weak, according to their power 
to move." 

'' Because arguments are addressed to the under- 
standing, will, and affections of men, they are called 
moral, inasmuch as their tendency is to form or 
change the habits, manners, or actions of men. 



118 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

Every spirit puts forth its moral power in words ; 
that is^ all the power it has over the views^ habits, 
manners, or actions of men, is in the meaning and 
arrangement of its ideas expressed in words ; or 
in significant signs addressed to the eye or ear/' 
pp. 347, 348. 

'^ The argument is the jpoiver of the spirit of mariy 
and the only power lohich one spirit can exert over 
another is its arguments. How often do we see a whole 
congregation roused into certain actions, expressions 
of joy or sorrow, by the spirit of one man. Yet no 
person supposes that his spirit has literally deserted 
his body and entered into every man and woman in 
the house, although it is often said he has filled them 
with his spirit. But how does that spirit located 
in the head of yonder little man, fill all the thous- 
sands around him with joy or sadness, with fear and 
trembling, with zeal or indignation, as the case may 
be ? How has it displayed such power over so many 
minds ? By words uttered by the tongue ; by ideas 
communicated to the minds of the hearers. In this 
way only can moral power be displayed. 

'' From such premises we may say, that all the 
moral power which can be exerted on human beings, 
is, and of necessity must be, in the arguments 
addressed to them. No other power than moral 
power can operate on minds ; and this power must 
always be clothed in words addressed to the eye or 
ear. Thus we reason when revelation is altogether 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 119 

out of view. And when we think of the power of 
the Spirit of God exerted upon minds or human 
spirits^ it is impossible for us to imagine, that that 
power can consist in anything else but words or 
arguments. Thus in the nature of things we are 
prepared to expect verbal communications from the 
Spirit of God, if that Spirit operates at all on our 
spirits. As the moral power of man is in his argu- 
ments, so is the moral power of the Spirit of God in 
his arguments.'' p. 349. 

'^ As the spirit of man puts forth all its moral 
power in the words which it fills with its ideas ; so 
the Spirit of God puts forth all its converting and 
sanctifying power ^ in the words which it fills with 

its ideas If the Spirit of God has spoken all 

its arguments ; or, if the New and Old Testament 
contain all the arguments which can be offered to 
reconcile man to God, and to purify them who are 
reconciled^ then all the power of the Holy Spirit 
which can operate on the human mind, is spent ; 
and he that is not sanctified and saved by these, 
cannot be saved by angels or spirits, human or 
divine.'' p. 350. 

"We plead that all the converting power of the 
Holy Spirit is exhibited in the Divine Record'' 
p. 351. 

" Hence it follows, that to he filled with the Spirit y 
and to have the Word of Christ dwelling richly in 
one, are of the same import in Paul's mind ; and as 



120 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINClPLES. 

a means to this e^cl^ Christians were to abound in 
ginging psalms^ hymns, and spiritual songs/' p. 360. 

"^ All the power of G-od or man is exhibited in 
the truth which they propose. Therefore, we may 
say, that if the light, or the truth, contain all the 
moral power of God, then truth alone is all that is 
necessary to the conversion of men, for we have 
before argued and proved, that the converting 
power is moral power." p. 362. 

'^ Assistance to believe! This is a metaphysical 
dream. How can a person be assisted to believe ? 
What sort of help ? and how much is wanting ? 
Assistance to believe must be either to create a 
power in man, which he had not before, or to repair 

a broken power The Holy Spirit was not 

given until the day of Pentecost. Hence if the 
Holy Spirit aided men to believe in Jesus Christ, it 
must have been subsequent to that date.'' pp. 
364, 365. 

'^ Can men just as they are found when they hear 
the Gospel, believe ? I answer boldly, yes^ — just as 
easily as I can believe the well-attested facts con- 
cerning the person and achievements of General 
George Washington. I must hear the facts clearly 
stated, and well authenticated, before I am able to 
believe them. The man who can believe one fact 
well attested, can believe any other fact equally well 
attested." Chn. Bap., 529. 

^^ Paul acts the philosopher fully once, and, if we 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINClPLES. 121 

recollect right, but once, in all his writings upon 
this subject. It has been for many years a favorite 
topic with me. It is in his first epistle to Timothy, 
^ Now the end of the commandment (or Grospel) is 
love out of a pure heart — out of a good conscience- 
out of faith unfeigned/ Faith unfeigned brings a 
person to remission, or to a good conscience ; a good 
conscience precedes, in the order of nature, a pure 
heart ; and this is the only soil in which love, a 
plant of celestial origin, can grow. This is our 
philosophy of Christianity — of the Gospel. And 
thus it is the wisdom and power of God unto salva- 
tion. "We proceed upon these as our axiomata in 
all our reasonings, preachings, writings — 1st, un- 
feigned faith ; 2d, a good conscience ; 3d, a pure 
heart ; 4th, love. The testimony of God appre- 
hended, produces unfeigned or genuine faith ; faith 
obeyed, produces a good conscience. This Peter 
defines to be the use of baptism, the answer of a 
good conscience. This produces a pure heart, and 
then the consummation is love— love to God and 
man.'' Christian System, 246. 

It would be easy to multiply quotations of this 
kind ; but the above will suffice to give clear and 
just views of Mr. Campbell's theory of the influ- 
ence of the Holy Spirit in the conversion and sanc- 
tification of men. There can be no mistake in re- 
ducing the system to the following propositions. 

A moral change is essential to the salvation of 



122 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

men — This change can be ejffected only by moral 
power — All moral power is in arguments, or truth, 
addressed to the mind by words, or other signs, 
equivalent to words — All the converting power of 
the Holy Spirit is in the words which he addresses 
to men in the Scriptures — Men need no divine or 
supernatural aid to exercise saving faith in Christ ; 
but can believe in him as easily as they can believe 
the well attested history of General Washington. 
This faith does not imply the existence of love, but 
brings a person to remission, or a good conscience, 
through baptism ; to a good conscience succeeds a 
pure heart ; and from a pure heart flows love — And, 
finally, to be filled with the Spirit is equivalent to 
being filled with the word. 

Of several positions in this scheme I disapprove ;- 
but shall, for the present, confine my remarks to 
its principal error — viz., that all the converting 
power of the Holy Sjnrit is iio the ivritten word, 
which he has indited and confirmed. 

It is desirable to divest this subject of all extra- 
neous matter. I fully concur with Mr. Campbell 
in the opinion that a moral change is necessary to 
the salvation of men. With all that he has written 
of the inspiration and importance of the Scriptures, 
and of their adaptation to promote the salvation ot 
men, I heartily agree. I do not think, more than 
he, that any new faculty is given, or any old faculty 
(understanding by the term physical^ not moral 



CAMPBELL SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 123 

power^) is repaired in conversion. It is freely ad- 
mitted that the Spirit operates through the word 
in the conversion and sanctification of men. But I 
understand Mr Campbell to maintain that the in- 
fluence of the Spirit in the work of conversion is 
limited^ and of necessity^ to the simple presenta- 
tion of arguments^ motives^ truth^ to the minds of 
men, by means of words, and other signs — that all 
the power of the Spirit in the conversion of men is 
in moral suasion. This he does explicitly teach, if 
words have any definite import. By physical power 
we operate on matter— by moral power on mind. 
^^ All the moral power which can be exerted on 
human beings, is, and of necessity must be, in the 
arguments addressed to them.'' The illustration 
employed by Mr. Campbell would seem to preclude 
the possibility of misunderstanding his views. The 
influence of an orator over his hearers is not exerted, 
by the entrance of his spirit into them, but ^^ hy 
words uttered hy the tongue ; hy ideas communis 
cated to'' their minds. Of precisely the same 
nature is the influence ascribed by Mr. Campbell to 
the Spirit in the conversion of men. '^ As the 
moral power of man is in his arguments^ so is the 
moral power of the Spirit of God in his arguments'' 
The Spirit of God exerts a moral influence in con^ 
version exactly like that which men exert in con- 
trolling the actions or emotions of one another, but 
stronger in proportion as his arguments are clearer, 



124 CAMFBELLISM IK ITS PRINCIPLES. 

fuller^ weightier, and more pertinently expressed. 
But the Spirit can do no more than reason, expos- 
tulate, and present motives. 

^^ If the New and Old Testament contain all the 
arguments which can be olBfered to reconcile man to 
God, and to purify them who are reconciled, thev^ 
all the power of the Holy Spirit which can operate 
on the human mind is spent ; and he that is not 
sanctified and saved by these, cannot he saved by 
angels or spirits^ human or divine," 

I should deem it needless to labor this point so 
carefully, did I not know that Mr. Campbell and 
his friends have almost constantly charged his op- 
ponents with falsely stating his views on this very 
subject. These were the views of " the agency of 
the Holy Spirit'' against which the ^^ Dover Decree'' 
was levelled. Elder A. Broaddus in the ^^ Appendix'^ 
to the " Extra Examined," published in 1831, thus 
wrote : — " In few words, then, Mr. Campbell's 
view, in regard to Divine influence, appears to me 
to be in substance as follows — The canon of Scrip- 
ture being closed, the actual work of the Spirit is 
done ; but the word of truth being dictated by the 
Holy Spirit — the influence of that word may be 
termed the influence of the Spirit : and this is all 
the Divine influence that is exerted. And then, 
God's Spirit, which is a Holy Spirit, being in his 
word, as my spirit (for example) is in my writings 
— ^in receiving the word we receive a holy spirit : 



OAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 125 

and this is all the Holy Spirit that is received.' p. 
48. Such were the views entertained by this astute 
and ingenuous writer^ of Mr. Campbeirs doctrine 
on the influence of the Spirit. This ^' Appendix'' 
was noticed by the Editor of the Harbinger in 
several Nos. of the Dialogue on the Holy Spirit, 
between Timothy and Austin ; and^ for a wonder, 
Mr. B/s statement of the doctrine was not called in 
question. 

Mr. Campbell maintains, or did maintain^ that 
all the converting power of the Holy Spirit is in the 
arguments or motives which he presents to the mind 
in the written Word. On this point I take issue 
with him. I maintain that there is an influence of 
the Spirit J internal^ mighty ^ and efficacious^ differ- 
ing from moral suasion ^ hut ordinarily exerted 
through the inspired Word, in the conversion of 
sinners. Whether this influence shall be called 
moralj from the effect which it produces, physical, 
from the energy which is put forth in it ; or spirit- 
ualy from the nature of the agent who exerts it, I 
have no wish to decide. It is for the reality and 
importance of this influence, not for its name, that 
I contend. 

The principal argument adduced by Mr. Camp- 
bell in support of his theory of conversion, is purely 
metaphysical. All power, he says, is either phy- 
sical or moral — ^by physical power we operate on 
matter, and by moral power on mind. A physical 



126 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

power cannot produce a moral eiFect. ^' And wLen 
we think of the power of the Spirit of God exerted 
upon minds or human spirits^ it is impossible for its 
to imagine^ that that power can consist in any thing 
else but words or arguments/' The gist of Mr. 
Camj)bell's logic seems to be this — We cannot com- 
prehend any power of the Spirit of God in conyer- 
sion. except that consisting in words or arguments : 
therefore^ it does not exist. What is this^ but to 
deduce a most unwarrantable conclusion from his 
own ignorance ? It were a sufficient reply to this 
reasoning, to quote the words of the Sayiour — ^^ The 
wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the 
sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, 
nor whither it goeth, so is eyery one that is born of 
the Spirit.'' John 3 : 8. But we haye more to say 
on this subject. To affirm, as Mr. Campbell does, 
'^that if the Holy Spirit has spoken all its argu- 
ments^ . . . then all the poiver of the Holy Spirit 
which cPvU operate upon the human mind is spent^' 
is a bold assumption. When a man has uttered all 
his arguments and persuasions to influence his fel- 
low, his power may be exhausted ; but when the 
Infinite Spirit has spoken all his arguments and 
persuasions for reconciling proud, perverse and 
stupid men to Christ, is his power spent ? Is there 
nothing more that he can do ? Are his resources 
exhausted ? Has he thus limited himself ? Has 
Mr. Campbell any authority for prescribing this 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 127 

limit to his power ? The truth is, this assumption 
is as unpliilosopMcal as it is unscriptural. God 
created the human spirit — ^has access to it — is per- 
fectly acquainted with all its springs of emotion and 
of action — and can, in ways unknown to us, and 
.without contravening the laws of its being, influence, 
impress, and guide it. He that made, can certainly 
renew the spirit of man, with means, or without 
them, as he pleases. It is no less the dictate of 
reason than of revelation, that " the king's heart,'^ 
and consequently the heart of every other man, "^ is 
in the hand of the Lord, as the rivers of water ; he 
turneth it whithersoever he wiU.'' 

The assumption that the Spirit can operate on 
the soul of man in conversion only by arguments, or 
words, is, not only unphilosophical, but contrary to 
divinely recorded facts. It is not true that physi- 
cal power cannot produce a moral effect. God 
created man, not by arguments or words, but by the 
direct exercise of physical power, in his " own image'' 
— which image comprehended '^ righteousness and 
true holiness.'' Was not this a moral effect pro- 
duced by a physical cause ? Christ was created 
holy. " The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee," 
said the angel to Mary, ^^and the power of the 
Highest shall overshadow thee : therefore that holy 
thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the 
Son of God." Luke 4 : 35. Was not the holiness 
of the infant Eedeemer a moral quality ? And was 



128 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

not this effect produced^ not by arguments^ persua- 
sion, or words, but by the '^ power/' the physical 
^^ power of the Highest ?'' 

The assumjDtion under consideration is incompati- 
ble with the salvation of infants. They enter into 
the world, as Mr. Campbell admits, with depraved 
hearts. Dying before they attain to years of intel- 
ligence, they must enter heaven with their moral 
natures unchanged, which is impossible ; they must 
be renovated by death, which is a mere j&gment ; 
they must be renewed by the Holy Spirit without 
the Word, the possibility of which Mr. Campbell 
cannot conceive ; or, they must be lost. I do not 
charge him with admitting this consequence ; but it 
appears to be logically deduced from the position 
which he assumes, and all his ingenuity has not 
enabled him to escape from it. 

Mr. Campbell's assumption is wholly at war with 
the Scrij)ture doctrine of Satanic influence. Satan 
and other evil spirits are represented in the Bible 
as exerting a mighty moral influence for the destruc- 
tion of men. They tempt, deceive, enslave, and 
degrade mankind. Satan is a mighty prince, and 
at the head of a great, spreading empire. But how 
do the evil spirits exert an influence over the minds 
of men ? By arguments, or motives, addressed to 
them by words, oral or written ? Certainly not ! 
But by a direct, internal, and efficient influence. 
Can Mr. Campbell comprehend it ? Will he reject 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 129 

the doctrine because he cannot ? Or will he con- 
cede to Satan and his angels^ a power which he 
denies to the Spirit of God ? 

Before quitting this subject^ another point de- 
mands notice. No writer has so bitterly denounced 
metaphysical speculations, and mystic theology as 
Mr. Campbell. One great object of hisEeformatiou 
was to rescue the Scriptures from the glosses of secta- 
rian theorizers. I must say, that I have met with no 
writer on the agency of the Spirit in conversion, who 
has indulged so much in metaphysical disquisition, 
labored so hard to establish a theory, or drawn such 
momentous consequences from his own fine-spun 
speculations. In his writings on this delicate and 
vital subject, he is far from confining himself to ^^a 
pure speech,'' of '• speaking of Bible things in Bible 
terms,'' and shows no peculiar desire to be guided 
by the plain and obvious import of Scripture lan- 
guage ; but taxes his psj^chological lore, and dia- 
lectic skill, to establish an ingenious theory drawn 
from, no matter what source — but not from revela- 
tion. True, he apologizes for his seeming inconsis- 
tency. He only opposes his enemies with their 
own weapons. He plunges into metaphysics to ex- 
tricate others from their labyrinth. The apology 
does not seem to me to be satisfactory. If Mr. 
Campbell uses the ^^ speech of Ashdod," why may 
not others ? How are we ever to be rescued from 



130 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

metaphysical subtleties^ if those who profess to re- 
form the abuse are most guilty of it ? 

I have endeavored to show, and, I think, have 
shown, that the doctrine that the Holy Spirit can 
operate on the mind in conversion only by argument 
or persuasion is a mere assumption, unphilosophical 
in itself, contrary to divinely attested facts, and 
pregnant with a most serious consequence. I would 
not, however, press this argument to an illegitimate 
extent. It does not follow that because the Spirit 
can operate on the mind, in other ways than by 
moral suasion J that he does so operate. This point 
must be established by other considerations. 

I will now proceed to offer direct arguments 
against Mr. CamphelV s theory of co7iversion, 

1. It overlooks J or at least ^ tender-estimates^ the 
inveteracy of human depravity. 

The Spirit of inspiration has drawn the picture of 
man's moral corruption in gloomy colors. He is 
utterly depraved— fleshly, sensual and impure. 
'^ That which is born of the flesh is flesh.'' John 
3: 6. He is without spiritual life, without holiness, 
without moral worth — ^^ dead in trespasses and 
sins." Eph. 2:1. He is alienated from Grod^ and 
opposed to his law, and consequently to truth and 
righteousness. ^^ Because the carnal mind is en- 
mity against God : for it is not subject to the law 
of God, neither indeed can be." Eom. 8: 7. This 
depravity pervades, and controls the whole man — 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 131 

blinding the mind, perverting the affections, stupi- 
fying the conscience, making rebellious and obsti- 
nate the will, and prostituting the members of the 
body as the instruments of sin. And this moral 
corruption of human nature is universal. '' For all 
have sinned and come short of the glory of God.'" 
Eom. 3: 23. 

It is proposed to make man, thus corrupt, obsti- 
nate and debased, a friend of God, humble, obedient, 
and meet for heaven — in short, ^^ a new creature,^' 
from whom ^^ old things have passed away,'^ and to 
whom ^^all things have become new.'' 2. Cor. 5: 
17. I do not charge Mr. Campbell with denying 
the doctrine of human depravity ; but his theory of 
conversion does not provide for the accomplishment 
of a moral renovation, at once so difficult, and so 
important. 

How, according to his scheme, is this great moral 
change to be effected ? Simply by the presentation 
of arguments, truth, and persuasion, to the mind by 
words, or other signs. When the Spirit has present- 
ed all his arguments, he has spent all his power. 
Of this scheme several things may be observed. 

First. It is oblivious of the chief difficulty in con- 
version. Mr. Campbell maintains that ^^ the argu- 
ments which are written in the New Testament'' 
must be '^ understood'' in order to exert their in- 
fluence on the human mind. Chn'ty. Restored, p. 
350. To understand these arguments requires at- 



132 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 

tention, candor, and a spiritual discernment. Men 
attend readilv to what they delisrht in, and believe 
easily what is congenial with their tastes ; but the 
^^ natural man/' the unrenewed, sinful man — has a 
deep-rooted aversion to divine truth. This aversion 
is an element and a proof of his depravity. He 
may hear or read the arguments contained in the 
Scriptures, through curiosity, politeness, or a cap- 
tious spirit ; but to expect of him a candid, serious, 
docile and obedient attention to them, is to expect 
to " gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles/' 
^^ For every one that doetli eml liateth the lights 
neither eometh to the lights lest his deeds should he 
reproved.'' If divine truth must be understood in 
order to be efficacious ; and if it must be candidly 
examined, before it can be understood ; and if every 
evil doer J hating the light, or divine truth, refuses 
to come to it, or consider it, how, on Mr. Camp- 
bell's theory, can any soul of man be saved ? But 
the scheme which I advocate — the Scriptural scheme 
—makes provision for overcoming this difficulty. 
God, by the gracious, inward, efficacious influence 
of his Spirit, prepares the heart for the reception of 
the Gospel. '^ Whose heart,'' that is, Lydia's heart, 
" the Lord opened, that she attended unto the 
things wliich were spoken of Paul." Acts. 16: 14. 
This woman ''' worshipped God,'' as did all the Jews, 
and Jewish proselytes ; but there is not the slight- 
est proof that she was pious. The very reverse is 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 133 

clear. Her heart was closed against the Gospel, 
else there had been no need for God to open it. 
She hated the light, neither would come to it. 
^^ The Lord opened/^ or inclined, her "heart'^ to at- 
tend " to the things which were spoken of Paul.'' 
Mr. Campbell is of opinion that the Lord opened 
Lydia's heart by the miracles which were wrought 
in confirmation of the Gospel. Chn'ty Kestored, p, 
354. Of this there is neither proof nor probability. 
There was no miracle wrought on the occasion. 
Miracles were utterly insufficient to awaken an obe- 
dient and saving attention, like that which Lydia 
gave, to the Gospel. John 11 : 47. The Lord 
opened the heart of this woman of Thyatira — really 
and effectively opened her heart, by a process which 
is not explained. As the result of this process she 
attended, promptly, honestly, and obediently to 
Paul's Gospel ; and but for this process, the apostle, 
though he had spoken as an angel, had spoken 
without success. 

Secondly, Suppose this great difficulty obviated, 
the sinner's attention arrested, and truth brought 
clearly before his mind, would hnoioledge of divine 
truthj without the special influence of the Spirit^ 
secure his conversion ? If ignorance is the only 
evil with which the Gospel has to contend, then 
obviously the illumination of the mind is all that is 
necessary for its removal. But ignorance, though 
it may be in itself criminal, is rather the effect than 



134 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

the cause of man's depravity. There is a corrupt 
disposition which blinds the understanding. '^ This 
is the condemnation, that hght is come into the 
Avorld, and men loved darkness rather than light, 
because their deeds were evil.'' John 3 : 19. The 
love of darkness — which signifies ignorance or error — 
is the very root of man's depravity. This love im- 
plies an aversion to light, truth, and holiness, and 
is the cause of the prevalent ignorance of divine 
things in the world. Conversion includes a cordial 
approbation of divine truth. 2 Thess. 2 : 10. Now, 
can arguments, however clear and weighty — persua- 
sion, however earnest and tender — and words, how- 
ever fitly chosen and expressive, change the tastes 
and dispositions of the soul ? Man hates Christ, 
not because he is ignorant of his character, but 
because of the contrariety in their tastes and dispo- 
sitions ; and it is proposed to change this hatred into 
love, simply by giving man clearer views of the 
qualities which excite his aversion. Man is opposed 
to the divine law, because it is pure, spiritual, and 
inflexible ; and it is proposed to overcome this 
opposition by revealing to him more fully its hated 
qualities. Man is averse to the light ; and it is 
proposed to subdue this aversion by increasing its 
splendor. I cannot but suspect the inefiicacy of 
this scheme of conversion. Sinful man needs some- 
thing more than light — more than arguments, per- 
suasion, words — for his moral renovation. " The 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 135 

wicked . . will not listen to the voice of charmers. 



charming never so wisely/' Ps. 58 : 5. 

Thirdly, The theory under discussion is contra- 
dicted hy Qiumerous well authenticated facts. If all 
the converting power of the Spirit is in the argu- 
ments addressed by him in words to the mind ; then 
it follows that every minister of the Word must be 
successful in converting souls to Christy in propor- 
tion to the distinctness with which he presents the 
arguments of the Spirit to the minds of his hearers. 
The same measure of power must^ under similar 
circumstances, produce similar results. But does 
this conclusion agree with the experience and obser- 
vation of Christian ministers ? But I need not 
appeal in this argument to questionable evidence. 
Christ was an unrivalled preacher of the Gospel. 
Mark 1:1. Never man spake as he did. For the 
weight of his arguments, the clearness of his illus- 
trations, the simplicity and force of his style, the 
fervency of his spirit, the dignity of his manner, the 
adaptation of his discourses to the circumstances and 
necessities of his hearers, indeed, for every excel- 
lence which could render his ministry attractive, 
luminous, and successful, he stands alone. Pro- 
phets and apostles gave him homage as the ^^ Light 
of the world.'' If all the converting power of the 
Spirit is in moral suasion, we might certainly infer 
that such a teacher as Christ would be eminently 
successful in winning souls. But what was the 



136 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

result of his ministry ? It was unsuccessful — not 
wholly so — ^but it produced no such results^ as from 
his preeminent qualifications might have been ex- 
pected — no great moral revolution^ and no extensive 
revival of true religion. His ministry seems to have 
been less effective than that of John the Baptist. 
Matt. 3 : 5, 6. More persons were probably con- 
verted by the preaching of Peter and the other 
apostles, on the day of Pentecost, than by the min- 
istry of Jesus during its whole period. The Apostle 
Paul quotes from Isa. 65 : 2, a prediction of the man- 
ner in which the Messiah's ministry would be treated 
amono; the Jews. ^^ But to Israel he saith, All dav 
long I have stretched forth my hands unto a diso- 
bedient and gainsaying people. '' Eom. 10 : 21. 
This prophecy was strikingly fulfilled in the history 
of Jesus. He was earnest and diligent in teaching. 
^^ All day long I have stretched forth my hands.'^ 
He uttered such arguments as should have convinced, 
and such entreaties as should have moved, his hear- 
ers ; but they were ^^ disobedient and gainsaying.'" 
The arguments, motives, and words of the Saviour, 
were eminently suited for their conversion ; but the 
converting power of the Spirit was not present — 
was withheld in wisdom and righteous judgment. 

2. Mr, CampheW s theory of the Spirit's influence 
is incompatible ivith j:)ra?/er for the conversion of 
sinners. 

I do not charge him with denying, or questioning, 



CAMPBELLISM IK ITS PRINCIPLES. 137 

the propriety of such prayer. On the contrary, he 
insists that it is obligatory^ and practices it. Still 
his theory and his practise are inconsistent. If all 
the converting power of the Spirit is in the written 
Word, then all that can be done for the conversion 
of sinners is to place the Word before their minds. 
The Spirit indited and confirmed the Word, and in 
that Word put forth all his moral or converting 
power. On Christians now devolves the duty of pre- 
senting the arguments, truths, and motives, contained 
in the written Word, to the minds of sinners. 
When all the arguments contained in the Old and 
'Ne\7 Testaments are brought before their minds^ 
^^ then all the power of the Holy Spirit which can 
operate upon'' them '^ is spent,'' and if they are 
^^not sanctified and saved by these," they ^* cannot 
be saved by angels or spirits, human or divine." 
Why then pray for the conversion of sinners ? Will 
the Spirit reveal the Word to their minds ? or in- 
cline their hearts to receive it ? Can any thing be 
added by the Spirit to its power and efficiency ? 
Prayer for any blessing implies the power of God 
to bestow it. When we ]3ray for our daily bread, 
it is implied that Grod so governs the seasons as to 
send rain or drought, fruitfulness or famine. When 
w^e pray that the sick may be healed, it is implied 
that Grod has such a control over man's physical 
nature, that he can, without a miracle, cure his 
diseases. So when we pray for the conversion of 



138 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 

sinners^ if we pray intelligently, we ascribe to the 
Holy Spirit the power to convert them. And this 
power is not inherent in the Word, any more than 
the power that wields a gword, is inherent in the 
sword. The Word is the instrument, but the 
Spirit is the agent of conversion. The Spirit gives 
efficiency to the Word, opening the mind to receive 
it, impressing it on the heart, and developing its 
excellence in the life. 

3. Mr. CamfhdVs theory of conversion is incon- 
sistent with the introduction of the Millennium, 

I will permit him to define what I mean by the 
Millennium, ^^ There is reason, clear, full, and 
abundant, to justify the expectation that the reign 
of favor, or the government of Jesus Christ, shall 
embrace, under its most salutary influences, the 
whole human race ; or that there are plain, literal, 
and unfigurative, as well as figurative and symbolic 
representations, in both Testaments, which au- 
thorize us to expect a very general, if not a U7ii- 
versal spread of evangelical influences, so that the 
whole race of men, for a long period of time, shall 
bask in the rays, and rejoice in the vivifying power 
of the Sim of Righteousness.'' Mill. Har. vol 1, p, 
54. This consummation, described in the glowing 
language of prophecy, has been the grand object of 
the hopes, prayers, and labors of the saints in all 
ages. Whatever contributes to hasten this glorious 
period must, if its tendency is perceived, awaken 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 139 

universal delight among the lovers of Christ. 
Every principle, theory, or practice, which is in- 
harmonious with its introduction is erroneous. So 
Mr. Campbell very properly teaches. '^ In de- 
tecting the false Gospels, nothing will aid us so 
much as an examination of their tendencies, and a 
comparison of their effects with what the Millen- 
nium proposes. The gospel of no sect can convert 
the world. This is with us a very plain proposi- 
tion ; and if so the sectarian gospels are defective, 
or redundant, or mixed.'' Mill. Har. vol. 1, p. 7. 
With the sectarian gospels I have now no concern : 
I wish to inquire whether the '^ ancient Gospel,'' 
furnishes any ground to hope for the introduction 
of the Millennial glory. I propose to try it by the 
rule which Mr. Campbell himself has prescribed. 

The Scriptural canon was completed nearly 
eighteen centuries ago. Christianity was clearly 
revealed, perfect in all its parts, and confirmed by 
indubitable testimonies. The inspired record, ac- 
cording to the teaching of the Bethany Eeformer, 
contains all the arguments of the Holy Spirit for 
reconciling men to God ; in this all his moral, or 
converting power is exhibited. Christ commissioned 
his apostles to go into all the world, and proclaim 
the Gospel to every creature. From the apostolic 
times to the present day, the servants of Christ, 
with the Old and New Testaments in their hands, 



140 CAxMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

have been laboring to convert the world to Christ. 
What has been the success of their efforts ? 

Three-fifths of the world are still shrouded in the 
gloom of paganism. Mohammedanism sways its 
hundred milhons of intelligent^ immortal beings. 
The ignorance, superstition, and spiritual domina- 
tion of Popery overspread the half of Christendom. 
The Greek church, little less corrupt and intolerant 
than the Romish, divides the remaining half with 
Protestantism. The various sects of Protestants, 
in the estimation of Mr. Campbell, stand in not 
much less need of conversion than the heathen. 
Such was the moral condition of the world when the 
'^ current reformation'' began. Then Mr. Camp- 
bell and his associates, disinterred the '^ ancient 
Gosper' from the accumulated rubbish of past 
ages. '^ About the commencement of this century," 
this is his account of the matter, ^' finding that 
notes and comments, that glosses and traditions, 
were making the word of God of little or no effect 
— I say, the pious of several of the great phalanxes 
of the rival Christian interests did agree to un- 
manacle and unfetter the testimony of God, and 
send it forth without the bolsters and crutches fur- 
nished by the schools ; and this, with the spirit of 
inquiry which it created and fostered, has contrib- 
uted much to break the yoke of clerical oppression, 
which so long oppressed the people, — I say clerical 
oppression ; for this has been, and yet is, though 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. X41 

mucli circumscribed, the worst of all sorts of op- 
pression/' Mill. Har., vol. 1, p. 4. Well, does the 
disinterred Gospel, or the unmanacled and unfet- 
tered testimony of God, furnish any more cheering 
indications of the Millennial dawn than the secta 
rian Gospels ? Its most sanguine advocates wil. 
hardly claim that it does ; or if they should, the 
futility of the claim must be apparent to all the 
world. I shall, in another place, examine more 
particularly the tendency and influence of Camp- 
bellism. I wdll merely affirm, what I suppose none 
acquainted with its progress will deny, that the pro- 
claimers of the '^ ancient Gosper' have found from 
experience that all the arguments which they can 
adduce from the inspired word— all the moral 
suasion which they can bring to bear on the minds 
of men — prove deplorably inefficient in their con- 
version. Churches organized according to the 
" ancient order of things,'' enjoying all the light 
that emanates from Bethany, blessed with the un- 
manacled testimony of God, without '^ bolsters or 
crutches," free from ^^ clerical oppression," and 
favored with the ministrations of reformed pastors, 
of their own selection, have, in many cases, become 
oold, worldly, and inefficient ; in others, have fallen 
into strife, and been weakened by divisions ; in 
some, have nourished in their bosoms the most 
deadly errors ; in not a few, have withered and 
perished ; and, if any of them have enjoyed unin- 



142 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

teiTupted, Millennial prosperity, their history is yet 
to be made known to the world. I do not write 
these things to disparage the Eeformers. I intend 
no invidious comparison between the fruits of the 
'^ ancient Gospel'' and of the ^^ sectarian Gospels.'' 
I am sorry that the history of the Eeformation 
should bear so close a resemblance, in its dark and 
unpromising features, to the history of the numerous 
Christian sects. The above facts have been stated 
simply because they are essential in the prosecution 
of the argument. 

How, in view of the above facts, is the Millen- 
nium to be introduced? Not by the ^^ sectarian 
Gospels," says Mr. Campbell. Not by the slow, 
imperfect and feeble progress of the Bethany Eefor- 
mation. He that hopes for such a result from it 
does not need to be reasoned with. It is most 
manifest that the Millennium cannot shed its bless- 
ings on the world without some new agency, or in- 
fluence, or some great increase of existing influences. 
We need expect no new revelations for our instruc- 
tion — no new powers to be imparted to the human 
mind — and no new means of spreading the Gospel, 
and enlisting attention to it. How then is the Mil- 
lennium to be introduced ? By an increased effi- 
ciency of the divine word. At this point the weak- 
ness of Campbellism is revealed. It admits no pro- 
vision for an increased efficiency of the divine word. 
Its theory of conversion is opposed to any such in- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FOKMA.TION. 143 

crease. The Holy Spirit, in the presentation of its 
arguments, has exhibited and spent all its converting 
power. All that can be done, according to this 
system, by men, angels, or the Holy Spirit, for the 
introduction of the Millennium, is to exhibit argu- 
ments or truth to the minds of men ; or, in other 
words, persuade them to be holy. What is this, but 
precisely what has been done by true ministers 
from the apostolic age down to the present time ? 
And what ground is there, according to this system, 
to conclude, hope or conjecture, that moral suasion 
will, in time to come, be more efficacious than it has 
been in time past ? The same facts and arguments 
must be proclaimed, in similar language, by men 
of like passions and infirmities, and to the same 
depraved, stupid and perverse race of beings, as in 
past ages ; and there is nothing in the theory under 
discussion, or the nature of the case, to justify the 
expectation that the fruits will materially diff'er in 
quality or quantity. It is true, the Scriptures pre- 
dict a great increase of knowledge and piety in the 
latter days ; and Christ will certainly fulfill the pre- 
diction ; and it is because Mr. CampbelFs theory of 
the Holy Spirit's influence in conversion, not only 
does not contain any provision for its fulfillment, but 
is clearly inconsistent with it, that it ought to be re- 
jected. But the view of the Spirit's agency which I 
maintain falls in most harmoniously with the Scrip- 
ture promises of a Millennium. His power is in- 



144 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATlOK* 

finite. He executes the purposes of Messiah. He 
can impart an unction to the ministers of Christ, 
and increase indefinite!/ their zeal^ diligence, fidel- 
ity and efficiency. He can dwell richly in all the 
saints, filling their understandings with light, their 
hearts with love, and their lives with his fruits. He 
can incline men to hear, embrace, and adorn the 
Gospel of Jesus Christ. In short, he possesses all 
the grace and energy which are requisite to secure 
the universal spread and triumph of the Grospel. 
The Millennium is to he introduced not merely by 
moral suasion, and providential dispensations, but 
by copious, general and powerful effusions of the 
Holy Spirit. The same Spirit which on the day of 
Pentecost gave signal success to the labors of Peter, 
and his co-laborers, will by a mighty, pervasive, and 
gracious agency — an agency in harmony with his 
own perfections, and the freedom of the human 
will — prepare men to receive, and spread abroad 
the Gospel, and thus fiU the earth with the know- 
ledge of the glory of the Lord. 

'^ The palaces,'' predicted the evangelical pro- 
phet, ''' shall be forsaken ; the multitude of the city 
shall be left ; the forts and towers shall be for dens 
forever, a joy of wild asses, a pasture of flocks ; 
until the Spirit he poured upon us frorii on higJi^ 
and the wilderness be a fruitful field, and the fruit- 
ful field be counted for a forest. Then judgment 
shall dwell in the wilderness, and righteousness re- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS ^PRINCIPLES. 145 

main in the fruitful field. And the work of right- 
eousness shall be peace ; and the effect of right- 
eousness, quietness, and assurance forever. Isa. 3 : 
14-17. 

The direct, Scriptural proofs of the reality of this 
effective agency of the Holy Spirit, I shall now at- 
tempt to furnish. 

4. The theory of conversion by moral suasion is 
contradicted by the plain teaching of the Scriptures, 

The question under discussion is not one of meta- 
physics but of revelation — it is to be decided not by 
an appeal to philosophy, but to philology. Of the 
nature and operations of spirits, and of the laws 
which govern them, we know, and can know, but 
little. Profoundly convinced of our ignorance, and 
liability to err, on the important but abstruse subject 
under consideration, we should earnestly inquire, 
what saith the Lord ? and endeavor, with childlike 
docility, to comprehend the import of his words. 

The inspired teachers have employed the strongest 
terms to denote that agency, or influence of the 
Spirit, by which fallen man is morally renewed. If 
their language does not express a real, effective 
agency of the Spirit, more powerful than persuasion, 
or the mere presentation of arguments to the mind, 
it is difficult to conceive how such an agency could be 
described. They inform us simply what the Spirit 
does, without attempting to explain the methods 
of his operation — an explanation which we should 



146 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINClPLLS. 

probably be unable to comprehend, and which would 
be unprofitable even if we could. I will adduce a 
few passages of Scripture which teach the direct, per- 
sonal agency of the Holy Spirit in conversion. These 
may not, in the judgment of other advocates of the 
doctrine, be the most pertinent or conclusive ; and 
I readily admit that they are not better suited to 
my purpose than many from which I have selected 
them. 

Conversion is, in the New Testament, described 
as a birfh — a new hirth—a birth of the Spirit, 
^' That which is horn of the Spirit is spirit'' John 
3:6. '^ We Jcnovj that ivhosoever is born of God 
sinneth not ; but he that is begotten of God keepeth 
himself and that wicked one toucheth him not/' 1 
John 5 : 18. I shall here take for granted, what 
ought to be universally conceded, that the phrases 
" born of the Spirit,'' and '' born of God,'' denote 
conversion, or the moral renovation of man — in an- 
other place I propose to examine this subject more 
particularly. There is a resemblance between gen- 
eration, or the natural birth, and conversion. The 
Spirit of inspiration has employed this resemblance 
to elucidate the subject of man's moral renovation. 
In physical generation the nature and quahties of 
the parent are conveyed to the child. " Adam 
begat a son in his own likeness." '^ That which is 
born of the flesh is flesh" — that is, not merely cor- 
poreal, but depraved, corrupt, partaking of man's 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 147 

fallen nature^ as the term flesh frequently means* 
So in the new birth^ the nature— the moral nature 
— of the Spirit— of God— is conveyed to his off- 
spring. ^^ That which is born of the Spirit is 
spirit''— resembles the Spirit— partakes of his holi- 
ness-^is spiritual. ^^ Love is of God ; and every 
one that loveth is born of God.'' 1 John 4:7, 
This mighty moral change is effected by the Gospel, 
^' Of his own will begat he us Vv^ith the word of 
truth." James 1:18. " The word of truth" was 
the instrument of regeneration— the efficiency was 
of God. God begat—communicated his own nature^ 
or moral qualities^ to the begotten— begat '^ of his 
own will/' according to his own choice or purpose— 
and the Gospel was the means which he effectively 
used in producing the change. To ascribe this 
spiritual birth to the power in the word— to the 
force of moral suasion — ^rather than to the influence 
and efficiency of the Holy Spirit, that operates by 
and through the word — -is as if the axe should 
boast itself against him that heweth therewith, or 
the saw magnify itself against him that shake th it." 
Isaiah 10 : 15. The argument, in brief, in this — 
that the new, or moral birth — implying a commu- 
nication of the divine nature — is effected not merely 
by the written word, but is ascribed to a voluntary 
and efficient agency of the Holy Spirit. 

Conversion is termed in the Scriptures a creation^ 
and described in a variety of language of similar 



148 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

import. '^ A new Tieart also will I give you^ and 
a new spirit will I put ivitliin you : and I will take 
away the stony heart out of your Jiesh, and I will 
give you an heart of fiesh,'' Ezekiel 36 : 26. God 
promised the Israelites; his chosen people^ that he 
would gather them out of all countries, and bring 
them into their own land ; and having done thiSj 
he would bestow on them a far richer blessing— 
would do in them a work, which neither men nor 
angels could perform. He would '^ take away the 
stony heart out of their flesh.'' The ^^ stony 
heart'' is a hard, insensible, corrupt, impenitent 
heart ; and this God promised to take away from 
them. He would do more. He would bestow on 
them a ^^ heart of flesh/' a ^^new heart," a ^^new 
spirit," — and this language certainly imports that 
he would give them a tender, holy, and obedient 
heart. We have passages of corresponding signifi- 
cance in the New Testament. "^ For we are his 
workmanship J created in Christ Jesus unto good 
tvorksj lohich God hath before ordained that we 
should walk in them.'' Eph. 2 : 10. This language 
is exceedingly strong. The conversion of a sinner 
is termed a creation. A convert is a new creature. 
The word employed in this text to denote this reno- 
vation— ^^ created," {nrl^G)^ is employed to express 
that exercise of power by which the universe was 
brought into existence. Eph. 3 : 9. Col. 1 : 16. 
No energy short of that which brought order out of 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 149 

chaos^ can renew the soul of man. That soul is, 
in its natural state, a moral chaos — daik, void, 
formless ; and nothing but Almighty power, and 
infinite grace, can restore it to life, light and 
beauty. '' Grod who commanded the light to shine 
out of darkness'' must shine into the heart '^ to 
give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God 
in the face of Jesus Christ.'' Now, I will ask any 
considerate and candid man, whether such language 
as this, which we have been examining, could have 
been used to denote moral suasion, without the cer- 
tainty of deceiving mankind ? When God takes 
away a ^^ stony heart," does he merely present 
arguments to display the evil and danger of sin, and 
persuade the offender to abandon it ? When he 
gives a '' new heart" — a " heart of flesh" — does he 
only use arguments to induce the sinner to be peni- 
tent, holy and obedient ? When he creates a man 
in Christ Jesus — makes him '^ a new creature" — 
does he simply address words to the eye or ear of 
the transgressor ? As well might it be affirmed 
that God created the world by arguments — that he 
ruled chaos by persuasion. It is true, '' God said^ 
Let there be light : and there was light." But let 
no one suppose that light was the product of the 
words spoken. 

If language is not ascribed to God in the act of 
creation, as the mere drapery of the narrative, it 
was uttered by him as the signal for the exercise of 



150 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

his creative energy. Christy while on earth, spake 
to those whom he healed ; but they were healed, not 
by his words, but by his power. '^ The power of 
the Lord was present to heal them." Luke 5 : 17. 
'^ He — the Lord — hath made the earth hy Ms power ^ 
he hath established the world by his wisdom, and 
hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion.'^ 
Jer. 10 : 12. 

Conversion is described as a resurrection from the 
dead, ''But God^ who is rich in mercy ^ for his 
great love wherewith he loved us^ even when we were 
dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, 
(by grace are ye saved),'' Eph. 2 ; 4, 5. The 
Ephesians ^^ were by nature the children of wrath, 
even as others.'^ v. 3. Their moral condition is de- 
scribed by the phrase ^^ dead in sins'' — a most 
expressive phrase, which can mean nothing less than 
that they were destitute of spiritual life or hohness, 
and were morally corrupt and helpless. From them- 
selves there was no hope. Their deliverance was 
from God. It originated in his '^ rich mercy,'' and 
'^ great love." In executing the gracious scheme 
of their salvation, he ^^ quickened" them, raised 
them from their death in sin, or infused into them 
spiritual life. This he did not merely by arguments 
or persuasion, but by the energy which raised Christ 
from the dead. They were quickened '' together 
with Christ." He was raised from the dead to secure 
salvation to all who should believe in him. Eom. 



OAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES 151 

4 : 25. As he was raised from a natural death^ so 
they, in virtue of his resurrection, were raised from 
a moral death, or a death in sin. And that the 
Ephesians were quickened by the same power that 
raised Christ from the dead, is clear from the con- 
text. The Apostle prayed '^ the Father of glory'' 
for them, that they might know, ^^what is the 
exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who 
believe, according to the working of his mighty 
power, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised 
him from the dead," &c. 1 : 19, 20. Here it is 
plainly affirmed that they believed '' according to 
the working of his (God's) mighty power which he 
wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the 
dead." The passage is thus paraphrased by Dr. 
McKnight, who cannot be justly suspected of an 
improper bias towards spiritual influence. That ye 
may know ^^ what is the exceeding greatness of his 
power ^ with relation to us Jews and Gentiles who 
believe, in making us alive from our trespasses and 
sins, (chap. 2 : 5) and in raising us at the last day 
from the dead, to enjoy the glories of his inheritance^ 
by an exertion similar to the inivorJcing of the strength 
of his force, which he exerted in Christ, when he 
raised him from the dead/' &c. If the power that 
raised up Christ from the dead was exerted in 
quickening the Ephesians, then it is obvious that 
they were not converted by the mere power of 
words. 



152 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

Before I proceed, I must meet an objection to 
the direct proofs which I have offered in support 
of the efficient agency of the Holy Spirit in conver- 
sion. It will not he denied by those who advocate 
the theory which I am combating, that believers are 
^^born of the Spirit/' ^'quickened/' /^created in 
Christ Jesus/' at least after baptism. But they 
maintain that the Holy Spirit having indited the 
Word, and confirmed it by signs and miracles — and 
having put forth all its converting power in the 
arguments which it contains — that now whatsoever 
is done by the Word is done by the Spirit. Men 
are regenerated, created anew, quickened, by the 
arguments or motives presented to their minds in 
the written Word, precisely as a congregation are 
convinced, agitated, and put into motion by the 
words of an orator, and whatever is ascribed to the 
Word is justly ascribed to the Spirit. The Spirit 
has completed the instrument of conversion — the 
recorded Word — put it into the hands of his church 
to be employed by them for its destined purpose ; 
and for all the good which they accomplish by it, he 
is entitled to the glory. This objection is plausible, 
and worthy of a careful consideration. 

It is neither common nor just to ascribe to the 
manufacturer of an instrument the work effected by 
it. The instrument may be good — perfect in its 
kind — admirably suited to its purpose ; and its 
maker may deserve high commendation ; but nobody 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 153 

would deem it proper to give liim the honor of the 
work done by it. Let me illustrate — The architect 
purchases tools of a manufacturer : they are of the 
best metal^ keenest edge, and most approved pat- 
terns — he erects a tasteful house — Would any man 
in his senses affirm that the tool-manufacturer built 
the house ? A daguerreotypist obtains from a fac- 
tory a camera obscura, and all the appliances neces- 
sary for practising his art, and succeeds in obtain- 
ing an accurate likeness of the President of the 
United States. What would you think of the fidel- 
ity of a reporter who should afiirm that Daguerre 
had taken a very exact likeness of the President ? 
Or^ would you be more favorably impressed with 
his discrimination and truthfulness, if he should 
publish that the maker of the camera obscura had 
succeeded in taking the picture ? But if the man- 
ufacturer of an instrument is the agent who uses it, 
then he is, in the fullest sense, the author of all the 
eff'ects produced by it. Whatsoever is done by the 
instrument, he does ; and he is justly entitled to the 
credit of it. 

Let me now apply the illustration. — The written 
Word is the instrument, divinely fitted and api3oint- 
ed for the conversion of sinners. This instrument, 
completed in the apostolic age, has been committed 
to the hands of the church to be by them employed 
for its appropriate purpose. It is their duty to 
translate the Word, print, circulate, expound, and 



154 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

enforce it^ call the attention of men to it^ and exem- 
plify in their lives its efficiency and loveliness. If 
the Spirit is the Agent — the all-pervading and 
mighty Agent — who uses the Word^ and the minis- 
ters of it, as suitable instruments for the con- 
version and salvation of sinners — or, in other 
words, if he, through these means, puts forth a 
special and efficient influence for their moral 
renovation — then, in the fullest sense, and with the 
strictest propriety, he may be said to beget — new- 
create — quicken — the subjects of his grace ; and he 
is entitled to all the praise of their salvation. But 
if, on the other hand, he has merely furnished 
the means of conversion — arguments to persuade 
men to turn to God — and these means have 
been successfully employed by his servants, I 
do not perceive with what pertinency the strong 
language under consideration can be applied to his 
agency. Let us recur to the illustration used above. 
The minister of Christ is an architect. '' I have 
laid the foundation,'' says Paul, ^^ and another 
buildeth thereon.'' The arguments, facts, motives, 
furnished by the written Word are, to follow out 
the figure, the tools by which the builder carries 
forward his work. Now, if the Spirit merely fur- 
nishes the tools, and exerts no effective agency in 
rearing the edifice, can it properly be termed his 
^^ workmanship ?'' Mr. Campbell's theory of con- 
version amounts to this — God fiirnislies the tools — 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPl^ES. 155 

we do the work. The Spirit of God, having, in the 
Old and New Testaments, spoken " all the argu- 
ments which can be offered to reconcile man to 
God/' all his power '' which can operate on the 
human mind is spent/' and it now remains for the 
disciples, unaided by the Spirit, to carry on the 
work of human salvation. But orthodox Christians 
believe and maintain, that the written Word, ordi- 
nances, churches, ministers of the Word, and provi- 
dences, prosperous or adverse, are so many means 
through which the Holy Spirit, infinite in grace and 
power, exerts a personal and efldcacious influence 
for the conversion and sanctification of men. 

" I have planted J Apollos watered ; hut God gave 
the increase. So then, neither is he that planteth 
anything, neither he that water eth ; hut Ood that 
giveth the increase'' 1 Cor. 3 : 6, 7. The church 
of Corinth is compared to a field — ^^ Ye are my 
husbandry,'' or ^^ field," according to McKnight's 
rendering. In this field the ministers of Christ 
were laborers together with God." v. 9. In it Paul 
planted. He was an apostle, eminent alike for piety, 
gifts, diligence, and fidelity in his ministrations. 
He was an evangelical pioneer in Corinth. Acts 
18 : 8. Here he sowed or planted the seed, which 
'' is the Word of God." Luke 8:11. Or, dropping 
the figure, he preached the Gospel with great plain- 
ness, pungency, and fervor. In the same field, 
Apollos watered.'' He was a preacher distin- 



^i 



156 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

guisbed for his tliorough knowledge of the Jewish 
Scriptures, the fervency of his spirit, the eloquence 
of his address, and the cogency of his reasoning. 
He entered into the labors of Paul and others ; and 
endeavored to irrigate and culture the plants which 
they had set. But Paul, who planted, and Apollos, 
who watered, were nothing, entitled to no glory, as 
'' God gave the increase.'' The text teaches that 
the success of Gospel ministers — even the most 
eminent — whether in the conversion of sinners, or 
the improvement of saints, is of divine influence. 
The doctrine is according to analogy. In the vege- 
table kingdom, God gives the increase. The best 
Beed, sown in the best soil, and in the best manner, 
will prove unfruitful, except God send sunshine, 
and rains, and dews, and a suitable temperature, to 
give the increase. The most skillful husbandman 
on earth, cannot make a blade of grass grow without 
divine aid. '^ That Avhich thou sowest, thou sowest 
not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may 
chance of wheat, or of some other grain. But God 
giveth it a body as it hath j)leased him, and to every 
seed his own body/' 1 Cor. 15 : 37, 38. It would 
be easy to show that the same principle pervades 
the animal kingdom. We might reasonably infer 
that this principle extends into the kingdom of 
grace. But on this subject we are not left to the 
uncertain deduction of reason. All increase in the 
evangelic field is of God. The piety and ability of 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 157 

the ministry — the truth proclaimed — the manner 
of pubHshing it — and the character of the people 
among whom it is preached, can furnish no guar- 
antee of success. If Paul and ApoUos were depend- 
ent on the Divine blessing and eflSciency for '' the 
increase/' no minister can reasonably hope to rise 
above this dependence. And if the success of Gos- 
pel ministers is from God, then it follows that the 
inspired facts and arguments which they are author- 
ized to proclaim are insufficient to secure it. Plants 
ing and watering^ figurative terms, comprehend 
within their legitimate import, all the uses that can 
be made of the Divine word — all the methods of 
instructing, warning, and persuading — all that can 
be said and done to give efficiency to the Gospel — 
and yet something more is demanded to secure the 
increase — even the Divine blessing and energy. In- 
deed, so powerless is the most luminous and faithful 
exhibitionof Divine truth, without God's cooperation, 
(v. 9.) that '^ neither is he that planteth any thing, 
neither he that watereth.'' To God be all glory ! 

'' Seeing ye have purified your souls in oheying 
the truth through the Spirit ^ unto unfeigned love of 
the brethren^ see that ye love one another ^ with a 
pure heart fervently f' 1 Peter 1 : 22. In this 
text the influence of the Word and of the Spirit 
are clearly distinguished. By nature our souls are 
impure, or sinful. All moral excellence lies in 
obeying the truth, or Gospel, (v. 25.) Conversion 



158 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 

is obedience to the truth ; and sanotification is a 
growing conformity to it. These positions will not, 
it is presumed^ be disputed. The Gospel alone is 
not sufficient to secure this obedience, though its 
facts are confirmed, its arguments are weighty, and 
the motives by which its claims are urged are high 
as heaven, deep as hell, and vast as eternity. An 
influence distinct from, and above the truth is in- 
dispensable to the production of this obedience. 
The Holy Spirit exerts this influence not in reveal- 
ing new truth, or creating new faculties ; but m 
disposing the heart to receive and be guided by the 
Gospel. This influence is particularly described by 
the word of the Lord in Ezekiel — '' And I will put 
my Spirit loithin yoUj and cause you to walk in my 
statutes^ and ye shall keep my judgments^ and do 
tliemr 36 : 27. 

^^ For this is the covenant that I will make with 
the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord ; 
I luill put my laws into their mind, and write them 
in their hearts ; and I will he to them a God, and 
they shall he to me a peopled' Heb. 8 : 10. The 
apostle is demonstrating the superiority of the new 
or Gospel covenant over the old or Sinai tic. Under 
the old covenant God inscribed his laws on tables 
of stone — under the new he writes them ^^on the 
fleshly tables of the heart.'' God's laws are excel- 
lent — a transcript of his own character. Between 
the law and the Gospel there is perfect harmony. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 159 

The Gospel is designed to sustain^ illustrate^ and 
enforce the divine laws. These laws, recorded first 
on tables of stone, and afterwards in the volume of 
inspiration, are worthy to be loved, and obeyed by 
men. But in order to receive a due appreciation 
of them, and a cordial submission to their author- 
ity, a new and peculiar process is necessary. They 
must be put '' into their mind,'' and written ^^ in 
their hearts.'' It cannot be doubted that the result 
of this process is a knowledge of the Divine laws, 
delight in them, and a willingness to obey them. 
This process is above the power and skill of men or 
angels. It is God's prerogative, and one of the 
privileges secured by the new covenant, that he 
puts his laws into the minds, and writes them on 
the hearts of his people. The law is the stamp 
which, with his ov/n hand, he impresses on the re- 
newed soul — the soul renewed by the very act of 
impressing it. It is pleasing to find that on this 
point my views are in harmony with those of Mr. 
Campbell. In his Christian System, describing the 
Subjects of the Kingdom, he writes, p. 156, 
" They all know the Lord." " All thy children 
shall be taught of God." The Holy Spirit of God, 
writes the law of God upon their hearts, and in- 
scribes it upon their understanding ; so that they 
need not teach every one his fellow citizen to know 
the Lord, ^' for they all know him from the least to 
the greatest." Now whether this process of writing 



160 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PBINOIPLES. 

the law upon the heart, and inscribing it upon the 
understanding is physical or moral, I am not con- 
cerned to decide. All I maintain is, that it is not 
owing exclusively to the force of argument in the 
Divine Law, or Word, that this deep, abiding, reno- 
vating impression is made upon the heart ; but to 
the inward, and effective agency of the Holy Spirit. 

Before I close this argument on the direct testi- 
mony of the Scriptures, I must make a single remark 
to prevent misconception. All those portions of 
the inspired volume in which conversion or sancti- 
fication, in whatever terms expressed, is ascribed to 
God, have reference to the Holy Spirit. He is the 
sanctifier. In the economy of man's redemption it 
is his prerogative to reveal and confirm the truth, 
and make it efficacious in man's moral renovation. 
This point needs no proof. 

5. The theory of conversion advocated by Mr. 
Camphelly is inconsistent with the plainly revealed^ 
and fairly conceded influence of the Holy Spirit in 
believers after baptism. 

That the Spirit of God dwells in the saints, or 
believers, as in a temple, to refresh and invigorate 
them, to quicken their devotions, and to make them 
fruitful in good works, is a truth so clearly taught 
in the Scriptures, and so generally admitted among 
Christians, that it is unnecessary to attempt to 
prove it. I will merely refer the reader to a few 
out of many Scripture proofs of it. Lev. 11, 13. — 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 161 

Eom. 8: 9.— 1 Cor. 6: 19.— Eph. 5: 5.— Phil 2: 
13.— Gal. 5 : 22-23. 

Mr. Campbell admits^ and maintains the effica- 
cious influence of the Holy Spirit in believers — an 
influence differing not in degree^ but kind^ from 
that by which a sinner is converted. As this is a 
very important pointy I will permit Mr. Campbell to 
present his views regarding it fully. 

" In the kingdom into which we are born of water^ 
the Holy Spirit is as the atmosphere in the kingdom 
of nature — we mean that the influences of the Holy 
Spirit are as necessary to the new life^ as the atmos- 
phere is to our animal life^ in the kingdom of nature. 
All that is done in us before regeneration, God oui 
Father efiects by the Word, or the Gospel as dictated 
and confirmed by his Holy Spirit. But after we 
are thus begotten and born by the Spirit of God — - 
after our new birth, the Holy Spirit is shed on us 
richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour ; of which 
the peace of mind, the love, the joy, and the hope 
of the regenerate is full proof ; for these are amongst 
the fruits of that Holy Spirit of promise of w^hich 
we speak.'' Chn. Sys., p. 267. 

I do not, I trust, misunderstand Mr. Campbell on 
this vital subject. He teaches that all that is done 
in us before regeneration — which in the Bethany 
dialect means '^ born of w^ater,'' or immersion — 
" God our Father,'' not the Holy Spirit, '' eff*ects 
by the Word;'' — but after our new^ birth^ '^ the Holy 



162 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

Spirit is shed on us richly through Jesus Christ our 
Saviour ; of which the peace of mind^ the love, the 
joy, and the hope of the regenerate is the proof/' 
The illustration employed by Mr. Campbell seems 
to preclude the possibility of misunderstanding his 
views. What the atmosphere is to animal life, the 
influences of the Holy Spirit are to the new life. 
As the animal, after its birth, is sustained by respi- 
ration ; so after we are '^ born of water,'' or im- 
mersed, we live — our new life is maintaine4 — ^by 
^^ the influences of the Holy Spirit." 

But to show that my interpretation of his lan- 
guage is in perfect harmony with what he calls the 
^' ancient Gospel," I will furnish another extract 
from his writings. 

'' Where there is a guilty conscience there is an 
impure heart. So teaches Paul : ' To the unbe- 
lieving there is nothing pure ; for even their mind 
and conscience is defiled/ In such a heart the 
Holy Spirit cannot dwell. When God symbolically 
dwelt in the camp of Israel, every speck of filth 
must be removed even from the earth's surface. 
Before the Holy Spirit can be received, the heart 
must be purified ; before the heart can be purified, 
guilt must be removed from the conscience ; and 
before guilt can be removed from the conscience, 
there must be a sense, a feeling, or an assurance 
that sin is pardoned and transgression covered. 
For obtaining this there must be some appointed 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 163 

way — and that means or way is immersion into the 
name of the Father^ Son^ and Holy Spirit. So that, 
according to this order, it is incompatible, and there- 
fore impossible, that the Holy Spirit can be received, 
or can dwell in any heart not purified from a guilty 
conscience. Hence it came to pass, that Peter said, 
^ Be immersed for the remission of your sins, and 
you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.' '' Chn. 
Bap., 439. 

According to the ^' ancient Gospel,'' if Mr. Camp- 
bell is a safe expounder of it, immersion — which in 
the '^ pure speech" of the Eeformation, is '' the re- 
generating act itself — ^is necessary for the remission 
of sins ; ''a sense ^ feeling ^ or assurance that sin is 
pardoned is necessary for the removal of guilt from 
the conscience ; the removal of guilt from the con- 
science is indispensable for the purification of the 
heart ; and the purification of the heart is an essen- 
tial prerequisite of the reception of the Holy Spirit. 
Immersion — the remission of sins — the removal of 
guilt — a pure heart — the influence of the Holy 
Spirit — and then love, meekness and humility, the 
fruits of the Spirit — is the established order in the 
^^ ancient Gospel," promulged from Bethany. I 
might notice many things in this order, from which 
I utterly dissent, but I must limit my remarks io 
the point in hand. Mr. Campbell does teach that 
there is an influence of the Spirit, after baptism, 
and the purification of the heart. When a man is 



164 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

^^born of water/' and his heart is purified, then 
the Holy Spirit dwells in him^ and love, joy, and 
other graces attest his presence and agency. All 
that is done in the believer before he receives the 
Spirit, God his Father " effects by the Wordr 

To do Mr. Campbell ample justice, I will permit 
him to explain and vindicate his views on this point. 

'^ But the Spirit is not promised to any persons 
out of Christ. It is promised only to them that be- 
lieve in and obey him. These it actually and 
powerfully assists in the mighty struggle for eter- 
nal life. Some, indeed, ask, ' Do Christians need 
more aid to gain eternal life — than sinners do to 
become Christians ? Is not the work of conversion 
a more difficult work than the work of sanctifica- 
tion ? Hence, they contend more for the work of 
the Spirit in conversion, than for the work of the 
Spirit in sanctification. This, indeed, is a mistaken 
view of the matter, if we reason either from analogy 
or from Divine testimony. Is it not more easy 
to plant, than to cultivate the corn, the vine, the 
olive ? Is it not more easy to enlist in the army, 
than to be a good soldier, and fight the battles of 
the Lord ; to start in the race, than to reach the 
goal ; to enter the ship than cross the ocean ; 
to be naturalized, than to become a good citizen ; 
to enter into the matrimonial compact, than to be 
an exemplary husband ; to enter into Hfe, than to 
retain and sustain it for three score years and ten ? 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 165 

And while the commands, ' believe^' ' repent j' and 
^ he haptizedj are never accompanied with any in- 
timation of peculiar difficulty ; the commands to the 
use of the means of spiritual health and life ; to 
form the Christian character ; to attain to the re- 
surrection of the just ; to lay hold on eternal life ; 
to make our calling and election sure, &c., are ac- 
companied with such exhortations, admonitions, 
cautions, as to make it a difficult and critical ajBfair, 
requiring all the aids of the Spirit of our God, to 
all the means of grace and untiring assiduity and 
perseverance on our part ; for it seems, ' the called,' 
who enter the stadium are many, while ' the chosen' 
and approved ' are few ;' and many, says Jesus, 
' shall seek to enter into the heavenly city, and shall 
not be able / ' Let us labor, therefore, to inter into 
that rest lest any man fall after the same example 
of unbelief/ '' 

"What religious teachers those are who '' contend 
more for the work of the Spirit in conversion, than 
for the work of the Spirit in sanctification,'' I do 
not know. I do not think that Mr. Campbell can 
name a single orthodox divine, of reputation, who 
does not believe that the influence of the Spirit is 
equally and indispensably necessary in conversion 
and sanctification. The question whether that in- 
fluence is more needed in the one process or the 
other, could have originated only from such meta- 



166 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

physical^ vague and barren speculations as abound 
in the writings of Mr. Campbell. 

But let us attend to the main point in our argu- 
ment. I understand Mr. Campbell to admit the 
influence of the Holy Spirit after baptism. '' These'' 
-—them that believe in and obey Christ— ^^ if' — the 
Spirit — ^^ actually andj poiuerfvjlly assists in the, 
mighty struggle for eternal life.'' This language is 
quite orthodox— scarcely distinguishable from the 
dialect of the populars. Whether this influence of 
the Spirit in believers^ by which they are actually 
and powerfully assisted^ is johysical, moral, or inde- 
finable^ he does not inform us. He not only admits 
the reality of this influence, but clearly states the 
ground of its necessity. Conversion, he teaches, is 
comparatively easy ; but sanctification is very diflS- 
cult. ^^Is it not more easy to plant, than to 
cultivate the corn, the vine, the olive ?'' " The 
commands ' believe^ ' repent^' and ' he haptized,^ 
are never accompanied with any intimation of pecu^ 
liar difficulty.'' ^^ We rejoice to know that it is 
just as easy to believe and be saved, as it is to hear 
or see.'' Chn. Bap., vol. 5, p. 221. It is quite 
clear that for a work so easily accomplished as con- 
version, no assistance of the Spirit is needed. '^ As^ 
sistance to believe ! This is a metaphysical dream. 
How can a person be assisted to believe ?" '^ All 
that is done in us before regeneration, (baptism) 
God our Father eff'ects by the Word." But w^hen 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 167 - 

the sinner believes, repents, is baptized, has a feel- 
ing that sin is pardoned, has guilt removed from his 
conscience, and his heart purified^ then '^ in the 
mighty struggle for eternal life,'^ he will need and 
receive the actual and powerful assistance of the 
Holy Spirit. '^ The commands to the use of spirit- 
ual health and life ; to form the Christian character ; 
to attain to the resurrection of the just ; to lay hold 
on eternal life ; to make our calling and election 
sure, &c., are accompanied with such exhortations, 
admonitions^ cautions, as to make it a difficult and 
critical affair ^ requiring all the aids of the Spirit 
of our Godj to all the means of grace and untiring 
assiduity and perseverence on our part.^^ Accord- 
ing, then, to the '' ancient Gospel,^' conversion is 
easy, and is by the Word, without any assistance 
from the Holy Spirit ; but sanctification, or the 
Christian life, is dilBBcult, and very critical, and can 
be carried on only by his indwelling, actual, and 
powerful assistance. From these views I utterly 
dissent. I maintain that conversion is a work no 
less difficult than sanctification — that the same 
influence which is requisite to nourish the new life, 
was requisite to originate it — that a man can no 
more repent and believe without the influence of 
the Spirit than he can love, rejoice, and continue to 
obey. I go farther, and insist that the influence 
of the Spirit in sanctification being admitted, it 
follows, as a logical sequence, that the same influ- 



168 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PBINCIPLES. 

ence is exerted in conversion, which is but the com- 
mencement of the work of which sanctification is 
the progress. 

Before I proceed to offer direct proofs in support 
of my position, I must briefly notice what Mr. 
Campbell has alleged in support of his views. This 
may be comprehended under three heads— 

First, '^ The Holy Spirit/'' he affirms, ^^ is not 
promised to any persons out of Christ,^' This posi- 
tion I do not controvert. The Spirit is bestowed 
on believers, in answer to prayer, to comfort, refresh, 
strengthen, and guide them — in fine, to carry on 
within them the process of sanctification. This 
privilege is peculiar to Christians. But I do most 
widely dissent from the inference which Mr. Campbell 
seeks to draw from this position. His reasoning is 
this : The Spirit ispro7nised only to believers ; there- 
fore, the influence of the Spirit is limited to believers. 
This reasoning is illogical. It is based on the assump- 
tion that God bestows no blessing which he does not 
promise. But this is not true. God's promises are all 
made to believers-— to the obedient— to the holy. So 
far as I know, there is not a promise in the Bible to 
the ungodly, except on condition of their repentance 
and faith. But the Divine blessings are bestowed 
profusely on the bad as well as the good — the dis- 
obedient as well as the righteous. Matt. 6 : 46. 
God has promised the Spirit of consolation and 
encouragement to believers ; but this truth is in 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 169 

perfect harmony with the doctrine that God's un- 
promised;, free, gracious, and sovereign Spirit exerts 
a real, powerful, and creative influence in changing 
carnal, ungodly men, into humble believers. 

Secondly, Mr. Campbeirs next argument in 
support of his views, is derived from analogy, ^^ Is 
it not more easy,'' he inquires, ^^ to enlist in the 
army, than to be a good soldier, and fight the 
battles of the Lord ; to start in the race, than to 
reach the goal ; to enter the ship, than to cross the 
ocean ; to be naturalized, than to become a good 
citizen ; to enter into the matrimonial compact, than 
to be an exemplary husband ; to enter into life, 
than to retain and sustain it for three-score years 
and ten ?" Analogies prove nothing. It is easy 
for Mr. Campbell to furnish examples in which it is 
more diflficult to prosecute than to commence an 
enterprise ; but these examples are far from proving 
that it is more difficult to continue than to begin a 
life of piety. Moreover, the Scriptural analogies 
are against Mr. Campbell's views. Conversion is a 
resurrection. Is it easier to raise a man from the 
dead, than to nourish him after he is made alive ? 
Conversion is a creation. Is it easier to create than 
to preserve that which is created ? Conversion is 
reconciliation. Is it easier to reconcile an enemy, 
than to retain a friend ? It requires the same 
power, and certainly no less an exertion of that 
power, to quicken a soul dead in trespasses and sins, 



170 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 

than to support and nourish the new life. So ana« 
logy and reason decide ; and nothing but unbridled 
speculation would doubt. 

Thirdly. Mr. Campbell derives another argument 
in support of his opinions from the difficulty of a 
life of piety. ^^ The commands to the use of the 
means of spiritual life and health ; to form the 
Christian character^ etc., are accompanied with such 
exhortations, admonitions, cautions, as to make it 
a difficult and critical affair.'' I admit the diflB- 
culty of a life of piety ; but assuredly the difficulty 
includes the obstacles at the commencement, as well 
as those in its progress. Take for illustration the 
text which Mr. Campbell has misquoted in the 
extract above as an illustration. ^'Strive to enter 
in at the strait gate ; for many, I say unto you, 
will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.'' Luke 
13 : 24. The entrance through the strait, or diffi- 
cult gate, the necessity of which we are here taught, 
includes conversion, if it does not primarily refer to 
it. The exhortation was addressed to captious, 
imbelieving Jews, who needed to commence, before 
they could pursue a life of piety. 

I am now prepared to offer direct proofs in sup- 
port of my position. 

My^rs^ argument respects i\iQ poioer of the Holy 
Spirit. It is this — if the Spirit can and does dwell 
in believers, '' actually and powerfully'' assisting 
them ^^ in the mighty struggle for eternal life" — 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. I7l 

then he can exert a similar influence in enlightening, 
quickening and renewing the ungodly. Call it 
moral, physical, or any other kind of power, the 
energy by which he assists Christians in their 
struggles may be exercised in giving sinners '' re- 
pentance to the acknowledging of the truth.^^ 2. 
Tim. 2 : 25. 

My second proof is derived from the nature of 
sanctification. It is progressive holiness. It is 
beautifully described by the wise man— ^^ The path 
of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more 
and more unto the perfect day.'' Prov. 4 : 18. 
Kegeneration is the commencement of holiness. 
Eegeneration and sanctification do not denote dif-- 
ferent processes, but the same process in different 
stages. They resemble each other as the child re- 
sembles the man, or the dawn resembles the day. 
I will not now stop to defend these definitions, 
partly, because I presume the advocates of the 
Eeformation will admit their correctness, and 
partly, because I purpose in another place to ex- 
amine more particularly Mr. Campbell's use of 
these terms. Now to maintain that regeneration or 
conversion, and sanctification are the result of dif- 
ferent influences, or processes, is about as discrimi- 
nating and wdse as to maintain that the dawn of 
day and the brightness of noon spring from diff'erent 
orbs. Conversion is holiness begun ; sanctification 
is holiness progressing ; but in both cases the holi- 



172 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINClPLEg. 

ness is of the same nature^ tendency and origin. 
To ascribe the commencement and the progress of 
this renovating process to different influences^ or 
authors, is as unphilosophical as it is unscriptural — 
is to adopt a visionary theory, without proof, with- 
out plausibility, and without advantage. 

My third proof is drawn from the direct testimony 
of revelation. The Scriptures, I may remark, in 
general terms, ascribe conversion to Divine agency 
in language as clear, strong and varied as they do 
sanctification. The Spirit that nourishes is the 
Spirit that begets : the Power that preserves is the 
Power that creates. But on this point revelation 
bears explicit testimony. " Being confident of this 
very thing, that he which hath begun a good work 
in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ." 
Phil. 1 : 6. This ^^good work'' is the work of 
grace in the soul— that process of moral purifica- 
tion by which it is fitted for communion with God. 
The same Agent who begins this work, in conver- 
sion, '^ will perform it,'' or '^ be completing it," in 
sanctification, '^ until the day of Jesus Christ." As 
Mr. Campbell admits that the Spirit carries on 
this good work, and as Paul teaches that he who 
carries it on also began it, it follows that the SjDirii 
began it. By '^ good worh^' in this passage, Mr. 
Campbell understands the liberality of the Philip- 
pian Christians to the apostle Paul. To favor this 
interpretation, he has in his New Testament 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 173 

abandoned the well established translation of 
McKnight^ which he professes to follow^ and 
adopted that of Thompson, in the preceding 
verse. Instead of ^^ fellowship in the Gospel/' as 
McKnight has it, or '^ your participation in the 
Gospel/' as Doddridge renders it, he has printed, 
on Thompson's authority, ^^your contribution for 
the Gospel." All the commentaries, within my 
reach, both Calvinistic and Arminian, are opposed 
to his interpretation of the sixth verse. ^^ Some 
sectaries," he says, have converted this good toorJc, 
into God's work, upon them, and have made the 
apostle invalidate his own exhortation to them, to 
work out their salvation with fear and trembling." 
New Trans. Appendix 32, The quotation by which 
Mr. Campbell aims to confirm his interpretation is 
singularly infelicitous. The Philippians are ex- 
horted by the apostle to work out their salvation, 
for this very reason, that '^ it is God which worheth 
in them to will and to do of his good pleasure." 
Phil. 2 : 12-13, or as the passage is more strongly 
rendered in Mr. Campbell's New Testament, ^^ For 
it is God who inwardly worheth in you, from he- 
nevolence, both to will and to work effectually," 
Now it is precisely this inward, effectual working 
of God in the Philippians, both to lulll and to work, 
which the apostle styles ^^ a good work," and which, 
he is fully persuaded God imll perform until the 
day of Jesus Christ, 



174 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

My last remark^ concerns the honor of the Holy 
Spirit, The theory which I am opposing repre- 
sents the infinite Spirit as condescending to carry 
on, and complete a work, which was commenced, 
and passed through its most difficult stage, without 
his influence. Man without any agency except the 
force of argument, contained in the written Word, 
is converted. He attends to the Word, is enlight- 
ened by it, sorrows for his sins, abandons them, 
believes in Christ, or heartily receives him as a 
Saviour, devotes himself with delight to the service 
of Christ, confesses him before men, braves scorn, 
persecution and death in his cause, and is baptized 
in his name ; and then, this easy part of the work, 
as Mr. Campbell deems it, but most difficult accord- 
ing to the Scriptures, having been performed, the 
Holy Spirit actually and poioerfully assists him in 
his mighty struggles for eternal life. What is this 
but to wrest from the Spirit the chief glory of his 
work ? 

Mr. Campbell, in his great zeal to steer clear of 
all speculative theology, maintains that all theories 
of the Spirit's influence in conversion are equally 
inefficacious and worthless. He thus writes — ^^ But 
who can live on essential oils ? Or will the art of 
speculating or inferring ; or will the inferences when 
drawn — that the Spirit without the Word, or the 
Word without the Spirit, or the Spirit and Word 
in conjunction, regenerates the human soul ; I ask, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. l75 

will the act of drawing these inferences, or these 
inferences when drawn, save the soul ? If they 
will not, why make them essential to Christianity, 
beneficial to be taught ?'' Chn. Bap., p. 269. I am 
no more an advocate of mere speculation and empty 
theory, than Mr. Campbell. The subject of the 
Spirit's influence has been a fruitful source of profit- 
less theorizing and vain jangling. I fully concur with 
him in the opinion that preaching the influence of 
the Spirit, is not preaching the Gospel ; and that 
much mischief has arisen from insisting on this influ- 
ence to the neglect of the duty of repentance and 
faith. But whether men are converted by the 
Spirit without the Word, or the Word without the 
Spirit, or the Word and Spirit in conjunction, are 
not questions of mere speculation, but grave, 
weighty, and practical. Whatsoever is legitimately 
inferred from the Scriptures is a part of Divine reve- 
lation, and profitable for instruction. The belief of 
it may not be essential to salvation ; and yet it may 
contribute to the growth, happiness, and efficiency 
of the disciples of Christ. The influence of the 
Holy Spirit in the conversion of sinners is not a 
mere theory, but a revealed truth, the belief of 
which is intimately connected with the progress of 
the Eedeemer's kingdom. The doctrine of the 
Spirit's efficient agency in the salvation of men, 
teaches us our entire dependence on God for the 
success of our efforts — even the most vigorous and 



176 CAMPBSLLISM IN IT3 PEINCIPLES. 

best directed — for the promotion of his cause. It is 
well fitted to impress upon the heart the word of the 
Lord unto Zerubbabel^ ^^ Not by mighty nor by power, 
but by my Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts/' Zee. 4:6. 
This Scriptural doctrine clearly understood and 
heartily embraced, must lead Christians to humble, 
earnest, and persevering prayer for the salvation of 
sinners. It shows them where all their strength 
lies, and whence all their help must come. It dis- 
poses them to give the honor of their success to its 
real author, inspiring them with, the devout senti- 
ment of the Psalmist, ^^ Not unto us, Lord, not 
unto us, but unto thy name give glory, for thy 
mercy, and for thy truth's sake/' In all ages, and 
in all countries, the truly pious, though differing 
widely on other subjects, have cordially united in 
the belief and maintenance of the doctrine of a 
supernatural agency in the conversion of sinners. 
Under the influence of this truth they have lived, 
their characters have been moulded, their labors 
have been performed, their prayers have been pre- 
sented to God, and their successes have been 
achieved. 

Much as Mr. Campbell was opposed, in the com- 
mencement of his Eeformation, to religious specu- 
lations, it was not a great while before he adopted, 
or elaborated, an abstruse, metaphysical theory of 
conversion. I will not affirm that^he taught regen- 
eration by the Word — by the force of arguments-- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 177 

without the Spirit. But if he did not so teach, in 
his Christianity Eestored, then it has not been 
taught by any writer within the compass of my 
knowledge, and I seriously question whether it has 
ever been taught in the English tongue. Indeed, I 
do not perceive how the clearest, and most discrimi- 
nating author, who admits the inspiration of the Scrip- 
tures, can teachit, if Mr. Campbell has not. Now, this 
" inference^' or theory, I am very far from deeming 
^^ essential to Christianity, beneficial to be taught.'' 
Nay, it is an illegitimate inference, a false theory, 
not '^ essential to Christianity,'' but subversive of it, 
not ^^ beneficial to be taught," but most pernicious. 
It cuts off all hope of divine aid, and all motives to 
pray for it. It greatly weakens a sense of obliga- 
tion to the author of salvation, if, indeed, salvation 
is compatible with the ^^ inference," and leads to a 
cold and heartless rationalism. 

I have not yet entirely disposed of the subject of 
the Holy Spirit's influence in the work of conver- 
sion. I have already referred to the difficulty which 
Mr. Campbell's opponents have found in compre- 
hending his views on this vital point. It seems 
thus to have arisen. While he has denounced the 
popular teaching on the subject, as mystical and 
pernicious, and has seemed most obviously to main- 
tain a new and peculiar theory of conversion, he has 
sometimes published sentences on this point to which 
the most rigid advocates of orthodoxy could find no 



178 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

objection. As early as the year 1826, Eev. A. 
Broaddus, over the signature of Paulinus, thus ad- 
dressed him — '' There are some among us possessed 
of strong apprehension that you are disposed to 
deny the existence of the regenerating and sancti- 
fying operations of the Holy Spirit on the spirit or 
heart of man ; and that you would ascribe all the 
religious effects produced in us, solely to the influ- 
ence of the written Word, or the external revelation 
of God. . . . For myself, I have said to others, as 
I now say to you, that I cannot think this of you. 
/ liave seen many things in your writings which 
appear inconsistent with such a sentiments' Chn. 
Bap., p. 266. We have already seen in an extract 
from the Appendix to the Extra Examined, pub- 
lished in 1831, that Mr. Broaddus had changed his 
opinion on this point. 

That I may do Mr. Campbell full justice, I will 
quote from his writings a few passages in which he 
appears to maintain evangelical views on the agency 
of the Holy Spirit. 

^^ But if any man accustomed to speculate on re- 
ligion as a science, should infer from any thing which 
I have said on these theories, that I contend for a 
religion in which the Holy Spirit has nothing to do ; 
in which there is no need of prayer for the Holy 
Spirit ; in which there is no communion of the 
Holy Spirit ; in which there is no peace and joy in 



Cx\MPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 179 

the Holy Spirit^ he does me the greatest injustice/' 
Chn. Bap., 269. 

^^ If any man ask me how the influence and aid 
of the Holy Spirit is obtained^ I answer^ By prayer 
and the Word of God/' p. 329. 

'^ From the answer above given to query first^ I 
am authorized to say^ that ' saving faith' is wrought 
in the heart by the Holy Spirit, and that no man 
can believe to the saving of his soul, but by the 
Holy Spirit." p. 353. 

Paulinus, in an article on the influence of the 
Sj)irit, thus summed up his argument — '^ The sub- 
stance of the leading sentiment maintained in these 
two essays is, that we are dependent on the influ- 
ence of the Holy Spirit to render the Word effectual 
to our conversion and final salvation.^' To this the 
editor of the Christian Baptist replied — '^ Although 
it might appear that some of the sentences extract- 
ed from diff'erent parts of the sacred volume were not 
originally intended to prove the position which was 
before the mind of Paulinus, yet still the conclusions 
to which he has come will be very generally em- 
braced as declarative of sentiments styled evangeli- 
cal. If this language does not endorse the doctrine 
of Paulinus, it is evasive, and unworthy of a candid 
writer.'' p. 437. 

^' On the subject of spiritual influence, there are 
two extremes of doctrine. There is the Word alone 
system, and there is the Spirit alone system. I 



180 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

believe in neither. The former is the parent of a 
cold^ lifeless rationalism and formality. The latter 
is^ in some temperaments^ the cause of a wild, irre- 
pressible enthusiasm ; and, in other cases, of a dark, 
melancholy despondency. -'' '••' ''' There yet remains 
another school, which never speculatively separates 
the Word and Spirit, which in every case of con- 
version contemplates them as co-operating ; or, 
which is the same thing, conceives of the Spirit of 
God as clothed with the Gospel motives and argu- 
ments — enlightening, convincing, persuading sin- 
ners, and thus enabling them to flee from the wrath 
to come.'' Debate with Eice, p. 614. 

^^ I would not, sir, value at the price of a single 
mill, the religion of any man, as respects the grand 
affair of eternal life, whose religion is not begun, 
carried on, and completed by the personal agency 
of the Holy Spirit." p. 614. 

" I believe the Spirit accompanies the Word, is 
always present with the Word, and actually and 
personally works through it upon the moral nature 
of man, but not without it.'' p. 745. 

I have selected these quotations partly from the 
early, and partly from the later writings of Mr. 
Campbell, taking the liberty of italicising a few 
terms. I could easily increase the list of pertinent 
quotations — but it is unnecessary. 

Concerning these extracts, one of three conclu- 
sions is certain. Either, Jirst, they contradict the 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 181 

quotations furnislaed in the commencement of this 
chapter — or, secondly ^ they must be interpreted in 
harmony with the theory of conversion by moral 
suasion, which I have ah^eady discussed — or, thirdly , 
they must be understood as agreeing substantially 
with the popular, evangelical doctrine of conver- 
sion by Divine influence. And these several con- 
clusions are entitled to particular attention. 

First. — Are the statements of Mr. Campbell con- 
cerning the influence of the Holy Spirit contradic- 
tory ? In my judgment they are. Whether his 
views on the subject were confused, or differed at 
different times, or were carelessly and vaguely ex- 
pressed, I wiU not say ; but they appear to me to 
be inconsistent. ^^ The only power ^'^ says Mr. 
Campbell, ^' which one spirit can exert over another 
is in its arguments.'^ If this is not the " word 
alone system^'' I would gladly be informed what 
that system is. I repeat, I must be permitted to 
doubt whether any man ever has taught, or ever can 
teach the system, if Mr. Campbell did not inculcate 
it in his Christianity Eestored. And yet he affirms 
in his Debate with Eice, ^' There is the Word alone 
system, and there is the Spirit alone system. I 
believe in neither.'' In one place he says, ^^ Before 
the Holy Spirit can be received, the heart must be 
purified.'' In another place he writes, ^' I would 
not value at the price of a single mill, the religion 
of any man, — whose religion is not hegun^ carried 



182 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

on, and completed by the personal agency of the 
Holy Spirit J' In one he represents that all that is 
done in us before regeneration, that is baj)tism, 
'^ Grod our Father effects hjthe Word /' in another 
he maintains, that in every case of conversion the 
Spirit and AVord co-operate, '^ enlightening, con- 
vincing, persuading sinners, and thus enabling 
them to flee from the wrath to come ;'' and that the 
Spirit ^^ actually and personally ivorks through^' 
the Word, ^^ upon the moral nature of man/' I will 
not affirm these various statements are contradic- 
tory ; but I do not perceive their harmony. For 
the sake of the argument, however, I will admit 
their agreement. And now I must inquire, 

Secondly, Are the last recited extracts from the 
writings of 3Ir. Campbell to be interpreted in har- 
mony with the theory of conversion by moral 
suasion ? Are we to understand all that he has 
said of the co-operation of the Spirit and Word — 
of religion '^ begun, carried on, and completed by 
the personal agency of the Holy Spirit'' — of his 
"' actually and personally'' working through the 
Word on ^^ man's moral nature'' — as meaning nothing 
more than that the Spirit addresses arguments, 
through the written Word, to sinners, to persuade 
them to be converted ; and that having done this 
his resources are exhausted, his power is spent ? In 
other words, is the actual, personal agency of the 
Spirit, pleaded for by Mr. Campbell, to be resolved 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 183 

into mere moral suasion ? If so^ tlie system has 
been already examined^ and the reader must decide 
whether it has been satisfactorily refuted. But if 
Mr. Campbell rejects the doctrine of conversion by 
moral suasion, or by the mere presentation of the 
arguments of the Holy Spirit to the mind, then I 
remark, 

Thirdly — That Mr, CamphelVs teaching is in 
substantial agreement with the popular evangelical 
doctrine of conversion through Divine injiuence. 
There is no middle ground between the '^ Word 
alone/^ or moral suasion system, and that which as- 
cribes conversion to the personal agency of the 
Spirit through the Word. This latter system is 
the popular evangelical system — the system uni- 
versally taught, when Mr. Campbell commenced 
his Eeformation, except by a few ultra-Calvinists, 
and lov/ Arminians and formalists — the system 
which permeated almost all our Biblical and theo- 
logical literature : our commentaries, Bible diction- 
aries, bodies of divinity, and popular sermons — in 
fine, the system which maintained a quiet, undis- 
j)uted, and controlling influence in all the orthodox 
churches of the land. I must confirm these state- 
ments by a few quotations from popular, evangelical 
writers, whose reputation preceded the Bethany 
Eeformation, and has not declined from its influence. 

^' The instrument of this renovation (regeneration) 
is ^ the word of truth.' In infusing the principle 



184 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 

of divine life into the soul, God is wont to employ 
the Gospel as the instrument/' E. Hall, vol. 3. 
p. 66. 

" The change which God produces in men's dis- 
positions and actions, by the truths of the Gospel 
impressed on their minds, is so great that it may be 
called a begetting, or creating them anew/' Mc- 
Knight. Note on Jas. 1 : 18. 

'' But though this Word (the Gospel) cannot beget 
without him (God), yet it is by this Word that he 
begets, and ordinarily not without it." Leighton's 
Works, p. 120. 

^' The Word J or doctrine of truth , what St. Paul 
calls the Word of the truth of the Gospel, Col. 1 : 5, 
is the means which God uses to convert souls/' A. 
Clarke's Com., Jas. 1 : 18. 

'^ In this passage St. Peter declares, that Chris- 
tians are born, or regenerated, did loyov, by means 
of the Word of God. Of course he declares, that they 
were not regenerated without the instrumentality 
of the Word of God. What is true, with respect to 
this subject, of the Christians to whom St, Peter 
wrote, will not be denied to be true of Christians 
universally." D wight's TheoL, vol. 4, p. 40-41. 

'^ The means (of regeneration) are pointed out ; 
the Word of trtith, i. e., the Gospel ; as Paul ex- 
presses it more plainly, 1 Cor. 4 : 15. This Gospel 
is indeed a Word of truth ; else it could never pro- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 185 

duce such real, such lasting, such great and noble 
effects.'' M. Henr/s Com., Jas. 1 : 18. 

" No regeneration, no quickening grace, no faith 
nor holiness, come this way (through the law,) but 
through the preaching of the Gospel ; in and 
through which, as a vehicle, the Spirit of Grod con- 
veys himself into the heart, as a Spirit of regenera- 
tion and faith/' Gill's Com., 1 Cor. 4 : 15. 

^'Here is a plain evidence, that the Word of God 
is the ordinary means of our regeneration, it being 
' the word preached,' the word we are to hear, 
(v. 19, 22,) and ^ receive with meekness,' by which 
the new" birth is by God wrought in us, and^ which, 
saith the apostle, is able to save the soul." Dr. 
Whitby's Com., Jas. 1 : 18. 

Even Andrew Fuller, who maintained a Divine 
influence in regeneration, ^^ which is immediate, or 
without any instrument whatever," and in which 
sentiment, so far as I have observed, he stood alone, 
did not consider this influence as producing the 
whole of that change denoted by the term regenera- 
tion. ^^ I admit regeneration," he says, ^ Ho be by 
the Word of God, and that this truth is taught by 
the passage in question, (1 Pet. 1 : 23,) and also 
in Jas. 1 : 18 ; nor does this concession appear to 
clash with the position above." Fuller's Works, 
vol. 1, p. 666. 

Quotations of this kind might be indefinitely 
multiplied, from the most enlightened, pious and 



186 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

approved authors^ showing conclusively that the 
doctrine in question was generally, almost univer- 
sally, held by evangelical Christians, before the first 
number of the Ghristian Baptist saw the light. In 
all the ^^ vain janglings/' to which the speculations 
of Mr. Campbell have unfortunately given birth, I 
do not remember to have heard but a single indi- 
vidual maintain the Fullerian theory, that regene- 
ration is commenced by a Divine influence, ^^ without 
any instrument,'' and he was an earnest and faithful 
minister of the Gospel, whose success was, in no 
degree, impeded by his peculiar theory. 

Now*if Mr. Campbell rejects the theory of con- 
version by moral suasion^ and holds that conversion 
is effected by the personal agency of the Spirit, 
through the written Word, then on this great, vital, 
distinctive principle of evangelical Christianty, he 
is found in company with our Halls, our Leightons, 
our Henrys, and a host of such Protestant worthies ; 
nor does he need to be ashamed of his company. 
On one merely speculative point, he differs from 
most, or all of his brethren. They believe that this 
is God's ordinary, or usual way of converting sin- 
ners ; the only way in which we should hope, labor 
and pray for their conversion ; but that he is not 
limited to this way. In the case of dying infants, 
or idiots, they believe that a moral change, equiva- 
lent to regeneration, is effected by the direct, per- 
sonal agency of the Holy Spirit, without the Word. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 187 

They found their belief on what seems to them to 
be a legitimate inference from clearly revealed truth. 
From this inference Mr. Campbell dissents ; and 
maintains not only that the Spirit does not^ and 
needs not^ but cannot oj)erate except through its 
arguments. As this pointy however, is purely specu- 
lative, and as Mr. Campbell admits the salvation of 
dying infants, and idiots, it cannot be deemed of 
great importance. 

Is he then to be classed among the orthodox 
teachers of a Divine influence in the conversion of 
sinners ? It will, doubtless, seem as strange to 
many as it was of old to find Saul among the pro- 
phets. For thirty years it has been his chosen em- 
ployment to denounce, by the tongue and the pen, 
in no measured terms, the '^ mystic theology,^' and 
'^ theoretic doctors,'^ and to expose the pernicious 
effects of the popular teaching on the influence of 
the Holy Spirit. He claimed to have made dis- 
coveries on this subject of great importance to the 
world. His admirers fancied that he had shed fresh, 
and most satisfactory light on it. They certainly 
received new views of this delicate and profound 
subject from their erudite instructor. One of them 
felt impelled to reflect the light which he had re- 
ceived '' about the Holy Spirit's operations in this 
metaphysical day,'' in the following unequivocal 
language, which was published in the Christian 
Baptist, '^ without note or comment." '' We must 



188 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

first hear^ then believe and reform ; then obey^ that 
ie^ be immersed ; then receive the regenerating 
Spirit^ with all its heavenly blessings promised to 
the believing sons and daughters of Adam. This 
appears to be so plainly inculcated in the New Tes- 
tament^ that I am astonished that I so long re- 
mained ignorant of the Grospel^ when at the same 
time I professed to be a teacher of it. And for this 
discovery I am indebted to you^ brother Editor.'^ 
p. 544. Another coadjutor^ and an accredited 
leader in the Reformation, thus wrote— '^ If they 
(the Samaritans) were converted before baptism, 
they were converted without the Holy Spirit, for 
they had been baptized, and yet ^ the Spirit had 
fallen on none of them.' . . . This passage (Gal. 2: 
2,) ought alone to decide this controversy about 
the work of the Spirit. The passages are abundant 
which teach the nature of the Spirit's work, and all 
are like the above, conclusive as to the fact, that 
the Holy Spirit dwells in the saints, and that he 
does not come to sinners to convert them J' Scrip- 
tural Reformation by Jas. Henshall, p. 23. But 
this confidence that new light had appeared was, it 
seems, illusory. Mr. Campbell believes as the great 
body of evangelical ministers in all the Christian 
sects, believes, that sinners are converted by the 
personal agency of the Holy Spirit, through the 
Gospel. But, surely, since the world began, have 
there never been so many labored arguments, so 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 189 

much learned criticism^ so much toil, debate and 
strife, such a waste of ink and paper, and such a 
multiplication of essays, pamphlets and books, to 
prove what scarcely any body doubted. The public 
mind was excited, the Christian world was agitated, 
the Baptist denomination, in several states, was 
thrown into confusion, manv of the churches were 
rent asunder, a new sect was formed, and the aid 
of earth and heaven was invoked in the contest ; 
and for what ? Why, simply because Mr. Campbell 
taught, what was almost universally admitted, that 
the Spirit in conversion operates through the Word. 
But what then becomes of the boasted Eeformation, 
of which the peculiar teaching on the influence of 
the Spirit constituted so important an article ? It 
turns out, if the supposition under discussion is 
true, that the Eeformation, on this important point, 
is no Reformation at all. We cannot avoid being 
reminded of a well known fable. Surely, there 
were never in any previous case, such sore travail, 
such mighty heavings, such piteous meanings, and 
such swelling expectations, in a simple case of abor- 
tion. 

Before I conclude my remarks on this subject, I 
must venture on a conjecture, which will, I fear, 
not prove very acceptable to Mr. Campbell and his 
admirers. It is this — When he commenced his 
career as a Reformer, his religious views were unde- 
fined and crude. His first object was to bring into 



190 CAMPBELLiSM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

disrepute the ^" mystic theology'' of the '^ popu- 
lars/' or ^^ clergy/' He found it necessary^ for the 
accomplishment of his purpose, to publish some 
theory at variance with the popular doctrine of the 
Spirit's influence in conversion. This new theory 
began to be developed about the year 1826, and was 
consummated, and fully revealed, in the year 
1831, when Austin taught the docile Timothy, that 
^^ every Spirit puts forth its moral power in words ; 
that is, all the poiver it has over the views, habits, 
manners, or actions of men, is in the meaning and 
arrangement of its ideas expressed in ivords ; or 
in significant signs addressed to the eye or ear." 
Christianity Eestored, p. 348. But after the Ee- 
formation resulted in an organized party, Mr. 
Campbell, to avoid the odium of his peculiar no- 
tions of the Spirit's influence, or because he found 
it easier to defend the popular doctrine, began 
gradually to modify his views, and to glide out of 
the theory of conversion by moral suasion, into the 
doctrine that conversion is by the actual, personal 
agency of the Holy Spirit. This modification of 
his views began to appear in a discussion of the 
subject with the Eev. J. M. Peck, and was still 
more apparent in his Debate with the Eev. N. L. 
Eice. But for Mr. Campbell to acknowledge that 
he had erred in the fundamental principle of his 
Eeformation, and that after all his wanderings, and 
denunciations of the '^ popular clergy," he had 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. l9l 

been compelled to admit the trutli of their teach- 
ing on this vital point, would have demanded a 
degree of humility and moral heroism, which the 
high-spirited Eeformer did not possess. 

I do not intend to impeach the motives of Mr. 
Campbell. With their moral qualities I have 
nothing to do. Men are influenced by considera^ 
tions of which they have little knowledge. Mr. 
Campbell has quite a fair share of human nature in 
him* He does not rise above the laws which govern 
other frail mortals. I have simply, and, I trusty 
kindly sketched what appears to me to have been 
his course in regard to the agency of the Spirit in 
conversion, and the motives that probably shaped 
it, and the intelligent and candid reader must form 
his own judgment. 

The Identity of Kegeneration, Conversion, 
AND Baptism. 

The subject of Begeneration^ or Conversion^ is of 
vital importance in the Christian System. On 
other points ignorance may be harmless, but on this 
it may be fatal. These terms, the former figurative, 
and the latter literal, are almost universally em- 
ployed by theologians to denote that moral renova- 
tion, by which fallen man is fitted for the service of 
Christ on earth, and the enjoyment of his presence 
in heaven. On this subject Mr. Campbell has put 



192 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 

forth new and peculiar views. He has vvTitteii on 
it largely. It occupies a conspicuous place in the 
Reformation which he has so zealously advocated. 
His thoughts on this topic^ scattered through his 
numerous periodicals, extras, and larger works, 
w^ould fill a ponderous octavo. I have endeavored^ 
sincerely and diligently, to comprehend his views on 
the subject, but have found it very difficult to do 
so. If they have not been obscure, variable, and 
contradictory, I confess to a want of perspicacity, 
which he, no doubt, will be very ready to admit. 
That the reader may judge for himself on this 
point, I will present in contrast a few quotations 
from the accredited works of the Eeformer. 

1. ^^ No man believes more cordially, or teaches 
more fully, the necessity of a spiritual change of 
our affections — a change of heart — than I do. I 
have said a thousand times, that if a person were to 
be immersed twice seven times in the Jordan for the 
remission of his sins, or for the reception of the 
Holy SjDirit, it would avail nothing more than wet- 
ting the face of a babe, unless his heart is changed 
by the Word and Spirit of God.'' Debate with 
Eice, p. 544. 

Now this is quite orthodox. No ^^ mystic doctor'' 
in the land could have discoursed on the subject in 
a more evangelical strain. But let the reader turn 
to the Mill. Har., vol. 1, p. 136, and he will find 
the following language : 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 193 

'^ The sprinkling of a speecliless and faithless 
babe never moved it one inch in the way to heaven, 
and never did change its heart, character, or rela- 
tion to God and the kingdom of heaven. But not 
so a believer, immersed as a volunteer in obedience 
of the Gospel. He has put on Christ.'' 

'^ The sprinkling of a speechless and faithless 
babe — never did change its heart /' but what is true 
of the sprinkling of an infant is not true of the vol- 
untary immersion of a believer. So Mr. Campbell 
seems to teach. But do I not misunderstand him ? 
He shall have the benefit of another quotation. 

'^ There are three births, three kingdoms, and 
three salvations. One from the womb of our first 
mother, one from the water, and one from the grave. 
We enter a new world on, and not before each 
birth. The present animal life, at the first birth ; 
the spiritual, or the life of God in our souls, at the 
second birth ; and the life eternal in the presence 
of God, at the third birth. And he who dreams of 
entering the second kingdom, or coming under the 
dominion of Jesus without the second birth, may, 
to complete his error, dream of entering the king- 
dom of glory without a resurrection from the dead.'' 
Chn. Sys., p. 233. 

Whether Mr. Campbell does here teach that we 
enter " the spiritual life, or the life of God in our 
souls, at/' not before, "the second birth,'' or birth 
^^ from the water," which in the terminology of the 



194 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 

Bethany Eeformation, means simply baptism ; and 
whether this teaching is compatible with what he 
has previously admitted of the inefficacy of baptism 
without a change of hearty the reader must decide* 

2. ^^ And will not every Christian say, that when 
a 'person feels and acts according to the faith, or the 
testimony of Grod, he is a new creature — regenerate 
— truly converted to God ?" Chn. Sys., p. 259. 
Certainly — I know no one that disputes this point. 
But ii feeling and acting according to the testimony 
or Word of God, constitute regeneration or conver- 
sion, why does Mr. Campbell affirm, as he does in 
this very volume, that '^ the Holy Spirit calls noth- 
ing personal regeneration except the act of immer- 
sion ?'' p. 202. And if baptism be the only Scrip- 
tural regeneration, as he maintains in this language, 
how can he reconcile this position with what he 
teaches in his late work on Baptism ? 

Among the Questions on Infant Baptism, we find 
the following — Ques. 103. Is baptism compared to 
any thing else in the Scriptures ? A. Yes ; to the 
regenerating influences and operation of the Holy 
Spirit. Hence we read of ^the washing of regener- 
ation,^ and of the ^baptism of the Holy Spirit.' 
Camp, on Bap., p. 431. But if the '' Holy Spirit 
calls nothing personal regeneration, except the act 
of immersion/' how can the Scriptures, the only 
medium through which the Spirit communicates 
with us, compare baptism to ^^ the regenerating in- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PBINCIPLES; 195 

fiuences and operation of the Spirit of God V^ Ts 
immersion in water an emblem of itself ? 

3. ^^ Now, as soon as, and not before, a disciple, 
who has been begotten of God, is born of water, lie 
is born of God, or of the Spirit/' Ch'nty Eestored, 
p. 206. ^' Begotten of God he may be ; but horn 
of God he cannot be, until born of water/' Mill. 
Har. Extra, p. 30. I have noticed this strange con- 
ceit merely to show how flatly Mr. Campbell contra- 
dicts it. Hear him — ^^ We are not baptized be- 
cause of our fleshly descent from members of any 
church, but because ^ horn from ahove — horoi of the 
Spirit' " Camp, on Bap., 390. But if we are 
baptized hecause we are '^ born of the Spirit," then 
clearly we are not only ^^ begotten of God," but born 
of God," hefore we are " born of water." Again, the 
distinction which Mr. Campbell sought to establish, 
in the above citations, between the phrases ^^ begot- 
ten of God," and ^^ born of God," he, in another 
place, thus earnestly repudiates.—^' I would not 
say that Mr. Eice has been sporting with the cre- 
dulity of the audience in his dissertations on hegotten 
and horn. Far be it. Yet really it looks more like 
an attempt of that sort, than at any grave argument. 
Whether we shall read, ^He that believeth that 
Jesus is the Christ, is born of God,' or is begotten 
of God, must depend on the taste and discrimination 
of the translator, as the word is the same in the 
original text." Debate with Eice, p. 457. 



196 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

I should find it easy to increase the list of seem- 
ing contradictions on this subject from the writings 
of Mr. Campbell ; but the above may suffice to con- 
vince the reader that it is difficult distinctly to com- 
prehend what he does aim to teach in regard to it. 
His views seem to be unsettled. What he affirms 
at one time^ he denies at another. What he insists 
on in the Millennial Harbinger Extra, as of great 
importance, he summarily dismisses in his Debate 
with Dr. Kice, as mere trifling. But amid the mass 
of confusion and contradictions, one point is clear, 
Mr. Campbell insists, frequently, and in a variety 
of language, on the perfect Identity of Begeneration^ 
Conversion, and Baptism. It is, or it was, an im- 
portant article in the creed of the Reformers. 

The substance of the Eeformation, on this point, 
as developed in the Millennial Harbinger Extra, and 
perpetuated in the Christian System, is this — Con- 
verts made to Jesus Christ hy the apostles were 
taught to consider themselves pardoned, justified, 
sanctified, reconciled, adopted, and saved, — These 
term,s are expressive, not of any moral quality, hut 
of a state or condition, — This change of state is 
effected, not hy any change of views or of feelings, 
nor hy faith, hut hy an act resulting from faith — 
and this act is Immersion, called with equal pro- 
priety. Conversion or Eegeneration. But let us 
listen to the highest authority on this point. '^ What- 
ever the act of faith may be, it necessarily becomes 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 197 

the line of discrimmation between the two states 
before described. On this side, and on that, man- 
kind are in quite different states. On the one side, 
they are pardoned, justified, sanctified, reconciled, 
adopted, and saved : on the other, they are in a 
state of condemnation. This act is sometimes called 
immersion, regeneration, conversion.'' Chn. Sys., 
p. 193. '' These expressions,'' (immersed, convert- 
ed, regenerated,) '^ in the apostle's style, denote 
the same act," p. 203. '^ For if immersion be equi- 
valent to regeneration, and regeneration be of the 
same import with being born again, then being born 
again and being immersed, are the same thing." p. 
200. 

I may have occasion under another head to ex- 
amine the above system — I shall, in this place, 
confine my discussion to the identity of baptism^ 
regenei^ation^ and conversion. 

Before I enter on my task, I must submit a few 
remarks to prevent misconception. 

Mr. Campbell has been frequently, but, I think, 
unfairly charged with teaching baptismal regenera- 
tion. As popularly understood, baptismal regener- 
ation denotes a moral change, effected through the 
influence of Christian baptism. Some things which 
Mr. Campbell has wTitten, as we have seen, seem 
to imply this doctrine ; and he has exposed himself 
to the suspicion of holding it, by quoting its advo- 
cates in support of his peculiar views ; but certainly 



198 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

he has not formally proclaimed it — he earnestly 
advocates principles at war with it. What he 
clearly maintains is^ not that we are regenerated by 
baptism^ but that baptism is itself regeneration^ and 
the only ^'personal regeneration," 

I do not charge Mr. Campbell with denying the 
necessity of a moral change preparatory to baptism. 
He has written equivocally^ perhaps it would be 
better to say, obscurely, on the subject. His love 
of novelty, the immaturity of his views, or the 
blinding influence of his theory, or all these causes 
combined, have impelled him to record many sen- 
tences, which ingenuity, less pregnant than his own, 
finds it difficult to reconcile with my admission. A 
pity it is, that an author, destined to exert so Avide- 
spread and moulding an influence in the world, 
should have written so carelessly and confusedly on 
so vital a subject. 

It is also due to Mr. Campbell to admit, that in 
the passages under discussion, he professes to use 
the terms Eegeneration and Conversion, not in their 
popular, but Scriptural sense. '' It is not,'' he 
modestly says, ^' the regeneration of the schools, 
in which Christianity has been lowered, misappre- 
hended, obscured, and adulterated, of which we are 
to write ; but that regeneration of which Jesus 
spoke, and the apostles wrote.'" Chn'ty Eestored, 
p. 257. It is to displace \]iq '^ jargon of the schools,'" 
by a '^ pure speech," that Mr. Campbell would 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 199 

have us to confound regeneration, baptism and con- 
version. 

Having made these preliminary remarks, I now 
take issue with the Bethany Keformer on the Iden- 
tity of Baptism^ Begeneration, and Conversion. I 
maintain that neither the term regeneration, nor 
conversion, nor a7iy equivalent term, nor the Greek 
words which they properly represent, nor any of 
their cognates^ are ever used in the Scriptures to 
denote baptism. 

Eegeneration. — This term as it has been already 
remarked, which is usually employed by theologians 
to denote that moral change by which man is fitted 
for the enjoyment of the kingdom of heaven, occurs 
but twice in the common version of the Scriptures. 
In the Greek it is irakiyyeveGla^ which literally sig- 
nifies a new birth, or creation. It is first found 
Mat. 19 : 28. Whatever may be its import in this 
passage, it is agreed, on both sides, that it refers 
neither to a personal renovation, nor to baptism. 
This text has no bearing on the controversy. Its 
last occurrence is Tit. 3:5. " Not according to 
works of righteousness which we have done, but ac- 
cording to his mercy he saved us, by the washing 
of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost. *' 
The phrase the ^'washing of regeneration," or ac- 
cording to McKnight's rendering, which Mr. Camp- 
bell prefers, '^the hath of regeneration," i^ under- 
stood by him to mean immersion, ^' Washing of 



200 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRIKCIPLES. 

regene7^atio7i/' he sajSy '^ and immersion are there- 
fore only two names for the same thing.'' Chn. 
Sys., p. 200. The phrase does not elsewhere occur 
in the Scriptures. That it means baptism is a 
mere assumption. The weight of authority is in 
favor of this opinion^ and there is no motive^ so far 
as this discussion is concerned^ to controvert it. 
The assumption is^ however^ subversive of the posi- 
tion that immersion and regeneration are identical. 
According to the assumption it is not regeneration^ 
but '' the washing of regeneration'' that means bap- 
tism. Baptism is a washing^ or, if Mr. Campbell 
prefers it, a hath^ emblematic of regeneration — 
alluding, as some suppose, to the cleansing of a 
new born infant. I need not farther discuss this 
point. I can adduce authority to settle this matter, 
of the greatest weight with the Eeformers, and to 
which Mr. Campbell will not demur. In his Debate 
with Kice, he thus discoursed — '^ I believe that 
almost all, if not absolutely all, the fathers, Greek 
and Latin, used regeneration and baptism as repre- 
sentatives of the same action and event. I do not, 
however, approve the phraseology used by them on 
this subject. I call baptism ^ the washing of the 
new birth,' rather than the new birth itself. So I 
think Paul most learnedly denominates it." p. 544. 
This point is settled. The term regeneration is 
never used in the Scriptures to denote baptism. 
Here we might drop this subject, were it not that 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 201 

kindred phrases^ sucli as ^^born of God/' "born of 
the Spirit/' " born of water/' (fec^ have been drawn 
into the controversy. It is necessary to dispel the 
mist that Mr. Campbell has spread over them. 
The Greek term^ jevvdo^ means to beget or gene- 
rate. Its derivatives in the New Testament are 
generally passive^ and mean to be begotten. It 
occurs in the writings of the apostle John fifteen 
times relative to a moral change. The following 
are the passages in which it is found — John 1 : 13. 
—3 : 3, 6, 7, 8.— 1 John 2 : 29—3 : 9—4 : 7—5 : 
1, 4, 18. Twelve times it is rendered horn — eight 
times it is found in the phrase " born of God/' or 
its equivalent — twice in the phrase " born of the 
Spirit/' and twice in the phrase "born again. '^ 
Three times it is rendered begotten — and every time 
it is contained in the phrase "begotten of God.'^ 
It is once rendered born in connexion with water — 
" born of water." John 3 : 5. Twice the term is 
employed by the apostle Paul to denote the in- 
fluence which he exerted in conversion ; but this 
sense of the term does not affect the controversy. 
1 Cor. 4 : 15.— Philem. 10. 

The phrases "born again/' "born of God/' &c,, 
have been universally considered by evangelical 
Christian writers as equivalent to a new birth, or 
regeneration. If men are born of God they must 
be re-generated. Even Mr. Campbell^ when his 
system is out of view, admits the soundness of 



202 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

this position. ^^ To the fruits of his labors/' he 
writes, ^^ such a preacher with Paul may say, to 
Jesus Christ, through the Gospel, I have regenera- 
ted^ or hegoUen you.'' Chn. Sys., p. 300. Now 
that these phrases (not including ^^ born of water''), 
all denote not baptism, or a change of state, but a 
personal, moral renovation, is clear and indisputable. 
To ascribe to immersion what is ascribed to this 
divine birth would be not only false, but ridiculous. 
^' Except a man be born again he cannot see the 
kingdom of God." Does baptism open a man's 
eyes ? '' That which is born of the Spirit is spirit" 
— spiritual, holy. Can such an effect be ascribed 
to baptism ? '' Whosoever is born of God doth not 
commit sin ; for his seed remaineth in him : and 
he cannot sin because he is born of God." Will 
Mr. Campbell venture to ascribe this efficacy to 
baptism ? '^ He that is begotten of God keepeth 
himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not." I 
need not say more to prove that these phrases de- 
note a moral change ; and the pertinency and force 
of the language for this purpose every intelligent 
mind must perceive. 

The phrase "^ born of water," John 3 : 5, what- 
ever may be its import — and I do not think it refers 
to baptism— cannot by any reasonable construction, 
or inference, justify the confounding of regeneration 
and baptism. Admitting that it means baptism, it 
is clearly distinguished from the new birth, or being 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 203 

^^ born of the Spirit/' and to confound them is not to 
interpret^ but to pervert the word of God^ and that 
too on a most vital subject. 

I have been greatly surprised to find on examina- 
tion v^ith how little caution and discrimination Mr. 
Campbell has discussed the subject of the new birth. 
Take the following passage as a specimen — ^^ Per- 
sons are begotten by the Spirit of Grod^ impregnated 
by the Word, and born of the water. In one sense 
a person is born of his father, but not until he is 
first born of his mother. So in every place where 
water and the Spirit, or water and the Word, are 
spoken of, the water stands first. Every child is 
born of its father, when it is born of its mother. 
Hence the Saviour put the mother first, and the 

apostles follow him Now, as soon as, and 

not before, a disciple, who has been begotten of 
God, is born of water, he is born of God, or of the 
Spirit. Begeneration is, therefore^ the act of being 
born/' Ch'nty Restored, p. 206. Had Mr. Camp- 
bell not proclaimed so frequently that his mission is 
to '^ restore a pure speech,''' it might easily be sup- 
posed that it is to introduce an unintelligible Jargon. 
A person is begotten of God, and bo7m of water — 
God is his father, and the water his mother — and 
this same person is impregnated by the Word. The 
work is begun in the Spirit, and ended, not in the 
flesh, but in water. ^^ How can these things be V 
'^ Now, as soon as, and not before, a disciple, who 



204 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

ha^ been hegotten of Godj is horn of loateVj lie is 
horn of Ood!' With equal clearness, taste and 
truth, might he affirm, That ^^as soon as, and 
not before, a disciple, who has been'' begotten of 
water, is born of God, he is born of water. Nay, 
the language would seem to be more in harmony 
with his system. ^^' In every place where the water 
and the Spirit are spoken of, theivater stands first, ^' 
It is not easy to say whether this jargon partakes 
more of the ridiculous or of the blasphemous ; yet, 
doubtless, its author meant it for sound theology. 
Now, the slightest attention to his Greek Testament, 
would have preserved him from this confusion of 
speech. He would have seen, as he subsequently saw, 
and confessed, that the same term is rendered in the 
common version, according to the taste of the transla- 
tors, hegotten or horn ; and that all arguments and 
deductions grounded on this distinction in the com- 
mon version would be merely trifling with the 
ignorance or credulity of his readers. And yet, a 
large portion of the sophistry and crudities with 
which the Millennial Harbinger Extra abounds, is 
drawn from this shallow conceit. 

Before I abandon this subject, I must submit 
another remark. The Greek word avaytwdLi which 
properly means to beget again, or to regenerate, is 
found twice in the New Testament. Once it is 
found in 1 Peter 1 : 3, and is rendered hegotten 
again, ^^ Blessed be the God and Father of our 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 205 

Lord Jesus Christy which, according to his abund- 
ant mercy, liath begotten us again unto a lively- 
hope/' &c. It occurs again in the 23d verse of the 
same chapter, and is rendered in the common ver- 
sion born agaiuj and by Doctors Doddridge and 
McKnight, with the sanction of Mr. Campbell, in 
his New Testament, regenerated. '' Being born 
again,^' or '^ regenerated, not of corruptible seed, 
but of incorruptible, by the word of God,'' &c. 
Now, it is clear and unquestioned that both these 
texts have reference, not to baptism, but to a per- 
/5onal and moral renovation. 

I have now shown that there is not the shadow 
of authority in the language of Christ, or his apos- 
tles, for confounding regeneration and baptism. 
They are totally distinct in their nature, design, and 
effects, as can be easily demonstrated. 

CoNVEESiON. — The Greek word, eTnGTpecj)^^ which 
means simply to turn^ occurs with its variations, in 
the New Testament, thirty-nine times, and nineteen 
times, if I mistake not, it refers to a moral change, 
total or partial, or to what theologians term conver- 
sion ; but never to immersion. That the reader 
may form his own judgment on this subject, I will 
cite the passages in which the term is found. Mat. 
13 : 15— Mar. 4 : 12— Luke 1 : 16, 17 ; 22 : 32— 
John 12 : 40— Acts 3 : 19 ; 9 : 35 ; 11 : 21 : 14 : 
15 ; 15 : 19 ; 26 : 18, 20 : 28 : 27—2 Cor. 3 : 16— 
1 Thess. 1 : 9— Jas. 5 : 19, 20—1 Pet. 2 : 25. 



206 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

The noun^ eizLorpoxjiri^ is used but once^ (Acts 15 : 3) 
and is properly rendered conversion. That these 
terms denote a moral renovation — the turning of a 
man^ soul and body^ to Grod — the evidence seems 
complete. " When thou art converted^ strengthen 
thy brethren.'' ^^A great number believed and 
turned unto the Lord'' ^' Brethren, if any of you 
do err from the truth, and one convert him ; let him 
know, that he which converteth a sinner from the error 
of his way, shall save a soul from death,'' &c. That 
the word in these passages denotes, not the act of 
immersion, but a hearty turning from sin to God, or 
from error to rectitude, the intelligent reader needs 
no proof. And what the term means in these texts, 
it uniformly means in the places where it refers to 
man's moral change. Yet, read what Mr. Camp- 
bell pens in the face of these truths. '' Conversion 
is on all sides, understood to be a turning to God." 
Very well ! . . . ^^ Here it is worthy of notice, that 
the apostles, in all their speeches and replies to in- 
terrogatories, never commanded an inquirer to pray, 
read, or sing, as preliminary to Ms coming^ hut 
alivays commanded and proclaimed immersion as 
the first duty J or the first thing to he done^ after a 
helief of testimony,'' The sincere '' belief of testi- 
mony," or faith in Christ, necessarily implies con- 
version, or ^^ coming to God." It is essential to the 
act, and inseparable from it. So an apostle teaches, 
'^ Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 207 

born of God/' and consequently converted. Now, 
it would have been strange, indeed, if the apostles 
had commanded an inquirer to ^^ pray, read, or sing, 
as preliminary'' to that which had been already done. 
If when Mr. Campbell affirms that the apostles pro- 
claimed '^ immersion as the first duty, after a belief of 
testimony j' he means that baptism is the first insti- 
tution in which the believer is required to make a 
public confession of Christ, I agree with him. It 
does not follow, however, from this position, that 
there may not be other, and important duties incum- 
bent on a believer previously to baptism. ^^ Hence,'' 
continues the Keformer, '^ neither praying, singing, 
reading, repenting, sorrowing, resolving, nor waiting 
to be better, was the converting act." Perhaps not ! 
Conversion, or turning to God, is necessarily a com- 
plex exercise^ comprehending that series of inward 
conflicts usually termed experience. Mr. Campbell 
continues — ^^ Immersion alone was that act of turn- 
ing to God." A more gratuitous assumption was 
never penned. It sets at naught the laws of philology 
and the teaching of revelation. Neither godly sorrow, 
repentance unto salvation, faith that works by love, 
nor a readiness to suff'er martyrdom for Christ, nor 
all these together constitute conversion ; but im- 
mersion alone^ (I give his own emphasis) is the act 
of turning to God. Let us hear him again. . . . 
'^ From the day of Pentecost, to the final Amen in 
the revelation of Jesus Christ, no person was said 



208 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

to be converted^ or to turn to God, -antil he was 
buried in, and raised up out of the water/' Chn. 
Sys., p. 209. Suppose I admit this position, is it 
possible that the astute Eeformer does not perceive 
that his reasoning is illogical ? Thus he reasons— 
None were said to be converted who were not im- 
mersed — ergo^ immersion — immersion alone, is the 
converting act. Let us try the force of this reason- 
ing in another case. '' From the day of Pentecost 
to the final Ameii in the revelation of Jesus Christ, 
no person was said to be'' holy '^ until he was buried 
in and raised out of the water/"' ergo, immersion and 
holiness are identical. But I will furnish a more 
carefully fortified illustration of this argument. 
" From the day of Pentecost to the final Amen iu 
the revelation of Jesus Christ, no person was said 
to" helieve in Christ, who had not been immersed. 
So Mr. Campbell testifies. " The apostle— never 
supposes such a case as is often before our minds— 
a believing unbaptized man. Such a being could 
not have been found in the whole apostolic age/' 
Debate with Eice, p. 50^.— Ergo, "immersion 
alone'' is the act of behoving. The conclusion fol- 
lows irresistibly, according to the principles of Mr. 
Campbell's logic. 

It is no part of my purpose to reconcile the as- 
sertion that " a believing unbaptized man" " could 
not have been found in the whole apostohc age," 
with the acknowledged truth that faith was a pre- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 209 

requisite to baptism, that the Ethiopian treasurer 
confessed his faith in Christ, previously to his bap- 
tism, and that ^^ many of the Corinthians, hearing, 
believed, and were baptized/' I will leave this for 
Mr. Campbell to do — a task for which his ingenuity 
eminently fits him. 

I will now notice Mr. Campbell's chief argument 
in support of his position. 

'^ The commission for converting the world 
teaches that immersion was necessary to disciple- 
ship ; for Jesus said, ^^ Convert the nations, im- 
mersing them into the name,'' &c., and ^^ teaching 
them to observe," &c. The construction of the 
sentence fairly indicates that no person can be a 
disciple, according to the commission, who has not 
been immersed : for the active participle in con- 
nection with an imperative, either declares the man- 
ner in which the imperative, shall be obeyed, or ex- 
plains the weaning of the command, 

" To this I have not found an exception : — for ex- 
ample — ^ Cleanse the house, sweeping it.' ' Cleanse 
the garment, washing it,' shows the manner in 
which the command is to be obeyed, or exj^lains the 
meaning of it. Thus, ^ Convert (or disciple) the 
nations, immersing them, and teaching them to ob- 
serve,' &c., expresses the manner in which the 
command is to be obeyed. 

If the Apostles had only preached and not im- 
mersed, they would not have converted the hearers 



210 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

according to the commission : and if they had im- 
mersed, and not taught them to observe the com- 
mands of the Saviour, they would have been trans- 
gressors. A disciple, then, according to the com- 
mission, is one that has heard the Gospel, believed 
it, and been immersed. A disciple, indeed, is one 
that continues in keeping the commandments of 
Jesus.'' 

The principle of construction, so warmly advo- 
cated by Mr. Campbell, is simply this — Active par- 
ticiples, when united with a command, invariably 
express the meaning of the command, or the man- 
ner of obeying it. 

Let us observe the injfluence of this principle in 
the interpretation of the commission. ^^ Go — teach 
all nations,'' — or convert all nations, as Mr. Camp- 
bell renders it — this is the command : ^^ immersing 
them," &c. The active participle immersing ex- 
presses the manner of converting the nations. 

This principle or rule is assumed by Mr. Camp- 
bell to be correct. He adduces the authority of no 
critic in its support. His only argument in its 
favor is a string of sentences so constructed as to 
agree with the rule. It is quite as easy, however, 
to form sentences at variance with it ; and it is 
purely a question of taste whether in such sen- 
tences the imperative mood, or the participle should 
be employed. It is worthy of remark, too, that his 
examples in support of the rule are all in the 



I 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 211 

Englisli language ; and his numerous criticisms^ and 
extended discussions^ furnish not the slightest 
evidence that the rule was based on a critical inves- 
tigation of the genius of the Greek tongue^ or even 
the slightest acquaintance with it. 

I will not follow him in his labored discussions on 
this point — I need not — I am greatly deceived^ if I 
cannot demonstrate by a shorter process the ah- 
surdity of the rule as applied to the commission. 
There are two Greek words in this solemn charge 
rendered teach. The first^ with which we have 
chiefly to do, is {j^ad-nrevoaTe from fiadTjrevu^ which in 
Donnegan's Lexicon is defined^ (^' act^ with an ac- 
cusative in N, T,,) to instruct/' It may be well to 
examine briefly its use in the New Testament. It 
occurs in various forms in this volume four times. 
Its first occurrence is Mat. 13 : 52 — ^' Therefore 
every scribe which is jLtadrjTevdelcy instructed, unto the 
kingdom of heaven^ is like unto a householder^ which 
bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and 
old.'' Dr. G. Campbell^ following the common ver- 
sion^ renders it instructed ; and Doddridge trans- 
lates it disciplined. There can be no reasonable 
doubt but that the word here means instructed^ 
taught, well informed. It is found again Mat. 27 : 
57, where Doctors Campbell and Doddridge concur 
with king James' translators in rendering it disciple. 
Joseph of Arimathea was ^^ Jesus' kfiad?]Tevae, disciple. 
Joseph was, according to the iisus loquendi of Christ, 



212 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS rRIXCIPLES. 

aud of tlie times, a discij^Ie of Jesus, tvitJioui bap- 
tism, for he was one '^ secretly for fear of the Jews/' 
The word occurs^ also^ Acts 14 : 21 — '^ And when 
they had preached the Gospel to that city, and had 
/^adTjrevcavrer taught many,'' or^ according to the render- 
ing of Doddridge, ^^ onade a considerable number of 
disciples, they returned again to Lystra/' &c. The 
apostles, according to their custom, proclaimed the 
Gospel, and taught, instructed the people, — made 
disciples, or learners of them — but whether they 
baptized them does not appear. The word occurs no 
where else but in the commission, where in the com- 
mon version it is translated teach, by Dr. Camp- 
bell convert, and by Dr. Doddridge proselyte, ^^ I 
render the v^oT^i^LaerirEvaare 2woselyteJ' he says, ^' that 
it may be duly distinguished from f^ddoKovTeg teaching, 
(in the next verse, J with which our version confounds 
it. The former seems to import instruction in the 
essentials of religion, which it was necessary adult 
persons should know and submit to, before they 
could regularly be admitted to baptism ; the latter 
may relate to those more particular admonitions in 
regard to Christian faith and practice, which were to 
be built upon that foundation.'' Fam. Expos, in 
loco. The sum of the matter is, that Christ in the 
command employed a term, whose obvious import is 
to instruct, to make a disciple, or learner, precisely 
such as was Joseph of Arimathea. But I can fur- 
nish in support of this view high authority for the 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 213 

learned^ and paramount authority for the Eeformers. 
In his Debate with Eice^ 13. 367, Mr. Campbell 
says — '' The great Grotius, in his simplicity, dis- 
tinguished matheteuo, the first word in the com- 
mission, as distinguished from didasco the last ; 
both translated teach in this common version, thus : 
Mathefeuo, says he, ^^ means to communicate the 
first, or elementary principles ; then after baijtizing 
those who receive these rudimental views, teach or 
introduce them as persons initiated into the higher 
branches of Christian doctrine.^' ^^ This,'' con- 
tinues Mr. Campbell, '^ is my view of the passage ; 
and, certainly, it is the etymological and well re- 
ceived meaning of the word, all the world over.^^ 

I am now prepared to apply the rule under dis- 
cussion to the commission. ^^ Gro, matheteusate, 
communicate the first or elementary principles,'" of 
religion, to ^^all nations." How ? The connected 
active participle, says Mr. Campbell, points out the 
manner of obeying the command — ^^ immersing 
them into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy 
Spirit." Communicate elementary religious instruc- 
tion, by immersing the body in water. Is it not 
absurd ? But I have not yet reached the climax 
of this absurdity. The second, as well as the first, 
subjoined participle prescribes the mode of perform- 
ing the command. Let us follow the rule. ^^ Go — 
communicate the Jirst or elementary principles" of 
the Gospel to all nations. How.^ Mirabile dictu ! 



214 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIl>LES. 

By teacliing, or introducing them, ^^as persons 
initiated, into the liiglier brandies of Christian doc- 
trine'' Communicate the elementary principles by 
teaching the higher branches ! Is it necessary to 
say more to expose the fallacy of the rule ? How 
incontrovertible then is the conclusion of that pro- 
found scholar, and eminent critic, Dr. Gr. Campbell, 
concerning the commission, Mat. 28 : 19-20. — 
'^ There are manifestly three things which our Lord 
here distinctly enjoins his apostles to execute with 
regard to the nations, to wit : matheteuein, bajDtizienj 
disdashein ; that is, to convert them to the faith — 
to initiate the converts into the church by baptism 
— and to instruct the baptized in all the duties of 
the Christian life.'' 

I must furnish another testimony on this subject, 
though pointedly at variance with the testimony of 
the same witness elsewhere given. ^^ In the com- 
mission which Messiah gave to his apostles for con- 
verting the nations, he commanded three things to 
be done, indicated by three very distinct and intelli- 
gible terms, viz : matheteusate, baptizonteSj didas- 
hontes/' Camp, on Bap., p. 116. This point is 
now settled. 

I must briefly notice one more argument in sup- 
port of the identity of conversion and baptism. It 
is founded on Acts 3 : 19. '^ Bepent ?/e, therefore^ 
and be converted^' &c. The argument is briefly 
this — Peter on the day of Pentecost preached re- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 215 

pentance — immersion — and remission of sins — and 
in Solomon's portico^ repentance — conversion — and 
the blotting out of sins. Mr. Campbell maintains 
that the latter was the same proclamation as the 
former^ conversion being substituted for immersion. 
This is a mere assumption. It is contrary to the 
plain and well understood import of the language 
used. The argument^ if argument it may be called, 
is based on a fallacy. It is this— thafc the apostles 
in their addresses to sinners proclaimed, uniformly, 
the same truths, and duties, and in the same order. 
Nothing can be farther from the truth* We have 
but a brief outline of their discourses in the Acts 
of the Apostles ; but they exhibit the greatest varie- 
ty of topics and arrangement. Their addresses are 
all in harmony — all substantially containing the 
Gospel — -but no two of them are precisely alike in 
language, method, or matter. To infer then that 
Peter preached baptism in Solomon's porch, con- 
trary to the plain import of his language, because 
he did on the day of Pentecost, is not merely illogi- 
cal, and opposed to the history of the apostolic 
preaching, but is to indulge in a license in biblical 
interpretation which may lead to the most pernicious 
consequences. 

Before I quit this subject, I must offer a few re- 
marks on another point. Mr. Campbell labors 
earnestly to prove that the early Christian Fathers 
called baptism regeneration, I shall not dispute 



216 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

this position. Their testimony seems to be entitled 
to but little credit. Their writings abound in 
peurile conceits^ gross mistakes^ and pernicious er- 
rors. None pays less deference to their testimony 
than Mr. Campbell^ when it is not in harmony with 
his views. Baptism was early confounded with re- 
generation^ of which it isj as he teaches us^ the 
^' emblem.'' Camp, on Bap.^ p. 430. The sign 
was mistaken for the thing signified. To this mis- 
chievous mistake there is among mankind a strong 
tendency. We see it in the monstrous doctrine of 
transubstantiation^ and in the idolatrous worship of 
the host. It is displayed no less clearly in the un- 
scriptural practice of infant baptism, the absurd 
dogma of baptismal regeneration, and many other 
errors with which the Christian world has been 
deluged. I only wonder that Mr. Campbell, the 
Eeformer, the restorer of a ^^ pure speech/' should 
be found following this evil tendency. 

PRAYER NOT A DUTY OF THE UNBAPTIZED. 

We have the doctrine of Campbellism on this 
point in the following extract : — 

'' No man can have a holy spirit otherwise than 
as he possesses a spirit of love, of meekness, of 
humility ; but this he cannot have unless he feel 
himself pardoned and accepted. Therefore the pro- 
mise of such a gift wisely makes the reception of it 
posterior to the forgiveness of sins. Hence in the 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 217 

moral fitness of things in the evangelical economy, 
baptism or immersion is made the first act of a 
Christian's life^ or rather the regenerating act itself; 
in which the person is properly born again — ^ born 
of water and spirit' — without which into the king- 
dom of Jesus he cannot enter. No prayers^ songs 
of praise, no acts of devotion in the new economy, 
are enjoined on the unhaptized.'^ Chn. Bap., p. 439. 

'This passage abounds in errors ; but I shall limit 
my remarks to one — a serious one — that the unhap- 
tized are not required to pray^ or perform other acts 
of devotion. 

This is not a chief, nor a prominent, but, certainly, 
not an unimportant item in the '^ current Keforma- 
tion.'' It is not directly expressed, but clearly im- 
plied in the language used. '^ No prayers, songs of 
praise, no acts of devotion in the new economy, are 
enjoined on the unbaptized/' But if they are not 
enjoined, either by express command, authoritative 
example, or fair implication, they are not obligatory. 
^^ Where no law is there is no transgression,'' and, 
consequently, no obligation. Error is prolific, and 
always brings forth after its kind. The error under 
consideration was the natural offspring of Mr. Camp- 
bell's false views of regeneration. Conceiving, most 
erroneously, that immersion was ^^ the frst act of a 
Christian's life, or rather the regenerating act itself,'^ 
he readily concluded that neither prayer, nor any 
other act which implied spiritual life, could be de- 



218 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 

manded of the unimmersed. This was an article of 
the primitive Campbellism^ often and variously ex- 
pressed. It has not^ so far as I have observed, been 
repeated in the later writings of Mr. Campbell, nor 
has it been repudiated. It stands among the re- 
corded and stereotyped items which compose the 
'^ ancient Gospel.'' It may have, it probably has, 
sunk into comparative forgetfulness ; but I well re-*- 
m ember that many of the primitive Keformers 
heartily embraced it, and deemed prayer before im- 
mersion as an invention of the '^ mystic doctors,'' a 
relic of the dark ages, and a grievous innovation on 
the *^^ ancient order of things ;" an error, in short, 
closely allied to '^experience he/ore baptism'' 

I do not know that Mr. Campbell would now 
maintain, or that any of the Eeformers now em- 
brace, the doctrine clearly inculcated in the above 
extract ; but I must, in justice to the system under 
examination, briefly expose its fallacy. 

Prayer has been the duty of man under every dis- 
pensation of religion. The obligation to this ser- 
vice springs from the relation between the infinitely 
merciful God, and fallen, guilty, and dependent 
man, in a probationary state. It is an essential 
element in true piety. It is the very breath of spir- 
itual life — a life which, I have already shown, does 
not depend on the act of immersion, but, in the 
evangehcal order of things, precedes that act. It 
implies repentance, faith, and Scriptural regenera- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES 219 

tion. No man can pray acceptably to God without 
renouncing his sins^ believing in Christy and having 
a new heart. And no man was ever a proper sub- 
ject for Christian baptism who had not been taught 
to pray^ sincerely, and fervently. 

What say the Scriptures on this point ? '^ And 
Jesus spake a parable unto them, (the disciples,) to 
this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to 
faint.'' Christ taught that men — not baptized men 
merely — but men^ irrespective of their character, re- 
lations, or professions — a?? men, ought ^ are under obli- 
gation, to pray. Though the term man is not found in 
the Grreek, and the language may be fairly rendered. 
It is proper to pray always^ yet it is obvious that 
the common version gives its true sense. Prayer is 
proper for all men^ at all times. Nay, but, says 
Mr. Campbell, ^^ no prayers in the new economy are 
enjoined on the unhaptizedJ' The publican prayed 
in the temple, and returned home justified, v/ithout 
baptism. The dying thief prayed on the cross, and 
was admitted into Paradise, without baptism. There 
is but one method, that even the ingenuity of Mr. 
Campbell can employ to evade the force of these 
Scriptures. It may be said, that Christ spake the 
parable of the unjust judge, and that the examples 
of the publican and of the thief occurred, before the 
new economy was fully set up. Well, I will fur- 
nish another, and unexceptionable example. When 
Saul of Tarsus was converted, the Lord directed 



220 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

Ananias to go to him^ ^^ for^ behold/' said tlie Lord, 
i" he prayetli!' Acts 9 : 11. It is clear from this 
Scripture, beyond a question, not only that Saul 
prayed before his baptism, but that his prayer was 
acceptable to the Lord, and that Ananias was sent 
to instruct and baptize him in consequence of its 
acceptableness ; and this example of acceptable 
prayer has all the weight, authority, and efficacy of 
an explicit command to the unbaptized to pray. 

Baptism is the first positive rite in the new eco- 
nomy to which the believer is required to submit ; 
and every believer should yield to it a submission as 
prompt as his circumstances will properly allow. 
But baptism is not the unconditional duty of a be- 
liever. His obligation to be baptized may depend 
on a thousand circumstances beyond his control. 
No properly authorized administrator may be will- 
ing to baptize him— he may be beyond the reach of 
one— the state of his health, or his want of personal 
freedom — and numerous other causes, may preclude 
the possibility of his baptism ; and, consequently, 
the obligation to be baptized. But is he not 
required to pray, and engage in other acts of devo- 
tion, until he finds an opportunity of performing 
what Mr. Campbell calls '' the regenerating act ?'' 
To ask the question, is to answer it. God has not 
made the duty of prayer or praise to depend on the 
act of baptism. The connection is wholly imaginary. 
It has no existence, and, so far as I am informed, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 221 

never had an existence^ except in the brain^ whose 
fecundity has supplied such a variety and exuber- 
ance of speculations for the pages of the Christian 
Baptist^ and Millennial Harbinger, and in the minds 
of those, whether many or few, who have, with un- 
questioning docility, derived their theological notions 
from these sources. 

THE REMISSION OF SINS IN BAPTISM. 

"Remission of sins^^ is equivalent to pardon or 
forgiveness, and does not differ essentially from 
justification. The phrase signifies deliverance from 
the obligation to suffer the punishment due to sins. 
The subject is one of manifest and transcendent im- 
portance. Its claims to our careful and devou.t 
attention are commensurate with the value of the 
soul, the malignity of sin, the preciousness of the 
blood of Christ, the depth of perdition, the height 
of glory, and the vastness of eternity. Our know- 
ledge on this subject must be derived solely from 
Divine revelation. Whether Grod will forgive sins, 
and if he will, through what medium, and on what 
conditions, are questions which only He can decide, 
and of his decisions we can have no knowledge, ex- 
cept as he reveals them to us. 

What do the Scriptures teach on this vital sub- 
Ject ? The orthodox belief is — that, in virtue of 
the atonement of Christ, God, freely and fully, 
remits the sins of all those who heartily repent, and 



222 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

cordially believe in Christ. In no article of faith 
are those Christians, usually termed evangelical, 
more generally and firmly united than in this. It 
is the distinguishing tenet of Protestant Christen- 
dom. Mr. Campbell, on the other hand, maintains 
that penitent believers are forgiven, not before, but 
in the act of immersion. ^^ Peter,'' he says, '' to 
whom was committed the keys, opened the kingdom 
of heaven in this manner, and made repenta7ice, or 
reformation, and immersiony equally necessary to 
forgiveness. . . . When a person is immersed for 
the remission of sins, it is just the same as if ex- 
pressed, in order to obtain the remission of sins. . . . 
I am bold, therefore, to affirm, that every one of 
them who, in the belief of what the apostle spoke, 
was immersed, did, in the very instant in which he 
was put lender water ^ receive the forgiveness of his 
sinSy and the gift of the Holy Spirit/' Chn. Bap., 
■p. 416, 417. I have italicised some clauses in the 
above sentences to draw particular attention to their 
meaning. The believer in Christ, however sincere, 
and whatever may be his moral state, is condemned, 
exposed to all the dreadful consequences of diso- 
bedience, until the very instant when he is put under 
water. Mr. Campbell teaches that baptism is per- 
fectly useless, " as empty as a blasted nut,'' to all 
who are pardoned. ^^ If men," he says, '^ are con- 
scious that their sins are forgiven, and that they are 
pardoned before they are immersed ; I advise them 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 223 

not to go into the water^ for they have no need of 
it/' Chn. Bap., unexpurgated edition, vol. 6, 
p. 160. 

The doctrine of Baptismal Bemission is the main 
pillar of Campbellism, It was slowly and gradually 
developed in the writings of Mr. Campbell, as it 
was, or was supposed to be, disinterred from the 
accumulated rubbish of past ages. It was, at length, 
fully revealed, strongly stated, and defended, at large, 
with all the learning, dialectic skill, and unwavering 
confidence of the redoubtable Reformer, in the famous 
Millennial Harhinger Extra. This precious relic was 
afterwards substantially embalmed in Christianity 
Bestored, and in the Christian System. The Extra 
for a time spread dismay in the ranks of the ^ '^regu- 
lars.'' Such an array of learning, logic, and author- 
ity, few were bold enough to encounter. But time 
tries all things. We have grown familiar with the 
Extra. We have seen many of its positions suc- 
cessfully assailed. We have seen the Reformer 
himself modifying, or abandoning some of his points. 
The most timid have recovered from their alarms. 

The system of Baptismal Bemission, developed 
in the Extra, 1 now propose to examine, with as 
much particularity as my plan will allow. 

Mr. Campbell, after some preliminary remarks, 
preseats and discusses his views of '^ the Christian 
institution for the remission of sins," under twelve 
propositions. 



224 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

The first six propositions he engrosses into one 
leading proposition^ in the following words^ viz. : 
'' The converts made to Jesus Christ by the apostles 
were taught to consider themselves pardoned^ justi- 
fiedj sanctified^ reconciled^ adopted^ and saved ; 
and were addressed as pardoned^ justified ^ sanctfied^ 
reconciled^ adopted^ and saved persons^ hy all loho 
first preached the Gospel of Christ J' Chn'ty 
Eestored^ p, 191. 

To this engrossed proposition^ I have no objec- 
tion. I am only surprised that Mr. Campbell should 
have deemed it necessary to encumber his argument 
with an elaborate discussion, of seven pages, to 
prove what no respectable writer, Protestant or 
Romanist, orthodox or heterodox, so far as I have 
observed, has ever denied. Let the proposition 
then stand '^ as irrefragably proved.'" 

But while I concur with the writer as to the truth 
of his proposition, I can by no means agree with 
him in his definition of its terms. '^ These terms,'' 
he says, " are expressive, not of any quality of mind, 
— not of any personal attribute of body, soul, or 
spirit — but each of them represents, and all of them 
together represent a state, or condition/' Does not 
the word ^' sanctified'' denote an attribute of the 
soul or spirit ? Is it not expressive of moral qual- 
ity ? It is generally so understood by Christian 
writers. When Christ prayed for his disciples, 
^' Sanctify them through thy truth," he desired that 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 225 

an effect might be produced on them, or in them, 
by divine influence, through the truth, and this 
could have been no other than a moral effect — the 
imparting or increasing of some quality of the soul 
or spirit. Does not Paul clearly distinguish it from 
justified^ which means a legal state ? ^^ But ye are 
sanctified J ye ^tq justified j in the name of the Lord 
Jesus,'' &c. 1 Cor. 6 : 11. I drop this subject. I 
readily concede that the term ^^ pardoned j' though 
not found in the common version of the New Testa- 
ment, and the term justified, denote a state, and 
that the term saved refers to a state, as well as to 
moral character ; and these are the only terms of 
importance in this discussion. 

I pass over all that Mr. Campbell has advanced 
concerning his engrossed proposition, as having no 
material bearing on the question at issue, and pro- 
ceed to notice — 

'' Prop, 7. A change of views, though it neces- 
sarily precedes, is in no case equivalent to, and 
never to be identified with, a change of state,'' 
p. 194. 

Very well ! I concur in this proposition. I know 
no one who dissents from it. I dismiss the two or 
three pages devoted to its illustration without far- 
ther consideration, and proceed to record — 

" Prop, 8. That the Gospel has in it a command, 
and as such must he obeyed." p. 196. 

Here the author falls into a grand fallacy. ^^ The 



226 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 

Gospel/' lie says^ ^^ has in it a command'' Where 
did he learn this ? It is not so said in the Scrip- 
tures. Nor is any thing recorded from which it 
may be legitimately, or even plausibly inferred. The 
texts quoted by Mr. Campbell are far from sustain- 
ing his proposition. The Gospel is, in some sense, a 
law. It is called by the Apostle James, '' the per- 
fect law of liberty.'' Jas. 1 : 25. Wherever the 
Gospel comes it imposes on those who hear it an 
obligation to obey it. But his conceptions of obe- 
dience to the Gospel must be extremely contracted 
who supposes that it consists in a single act. To 
'^ obey the OospeV is more than to be immersed. 
This act, though right in its proper place, is not 
obedience to the Gospel. Eepentance, faith, love, 
baptism, prayer, praise, watchfulness, participation 
in the Lord's Supper, and perseverance in every 
good work, are all required by the Gospel, and com- 
prehended in obeying it. It is most illogical to 
infer, that because the apostles speak of obedience 
to the Gospel, that it has in it a command that 
must be obeyed. 

^^ The obedience of the Gospel is called the obe- 
dience of faith J compared with the obedience of 
law" — says Mr. Campbell. Very good ! I endorse 
the sentence. But, by what authority, divine, or 
human, or according to what rule of logic, does he 
call the ^' obedience of the Gospel," an ^^ act of obe- 



OAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 227 

dience/' and the '^ obedience of faith/' ^^ the act of 
faith ?" Let us hear him — 

^^ Whatever the act of faith may be^ it necessa- 
rily becomes the line of discrimination between the 
two states before described. On this side^ and on 
that^ mankind are in quite different states. On the 
one side^ they are pardoned^ justified^ sanctified^ 
reconciled^ adopted^ and saved : on the other they 
are in a state of condemnation. This act is some- 
times called immersion^ regeneration^ conversion'' 

If the ^^ obedience of faith'' is an act^ it is a mere 
assumption that that act is immersion, I will cut 
this matter short. I will prove by testimony, which 
in this discussion is next in authority to that of 
Holy Writ, that the phrase ^' obedience of faith/' 
or "^ obey the Gospel/' does not mean ^^ a single 
act/' and^ consequently, does not mean immersion, 
I will quote Mr. Campbell against Mr. Campbell ; 
or the matured and subtle opponent of Mr. Eice 
against the ardent and impetuous author of the 
Extra, resolved on establishing a favorite system. 
Hear the deponent— 

'' We neither believe nor teach that the phrase 
^ obedience of faith' means one single act ; or that 
obeying the Gospel is one solitary deed. Certainly 
they do not ^ obey the Gospel, who do not obey 
the first precept, any more than they who obey the 
first, and afterwards apostatize. The Gospel calls 
for perpetual obedience, or a life of conformity to 



228 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES 

its pure and elevated piety and humanity/' Debate 
with Eice^ p. 534. 

Having^ through the puissant aid of Mr. Camp- 
bell, demolished the eighth proposition, I will now 
proceed to examine — 

^^ Prop. 9. That it is notfaithj hut an act result- 
ing from faithy which changes our state, lue shall 
now attempt to proved' p. 198. 

This proposition brings up the real question at 
issue. The previous propositions, with the sixteen 
pages devoted to their illustration, and proof, are 
of very little consequence in its decision. We are 
at last brought to the simple question. What do 
the Scriptures teach concerning the means iy which 
forgiveness J or justification must he ohtained ? On 
this question I take issue with Mr. Campbell, and 
maintain that it is faith, and not an act resulting 
from faith, that changes our state, or secures our 
justification. 

Let us endeavor to free from all encumbrance the 
question under discussion. Men are by nature sin- 
ful, alienated from God by wicked works, and are, 
consequently, condemned, or obnoxious to punish- 
ment. Between a state of condemnation and justi- 
fication — a state of pardon and of guilt, there is no 
medium. The transition from the one state to the 
other must be instantaneous. I maintain, in com- 
mon with evangelical Christians of every name, 
that the sinner passes from a state of condemnation 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 229 

to a state of justification at the precise moment 
when he truly believes in Christ, or, which is the 
same thing, receives him as a Dehverer. John 1 : 
12. This justifying faith is not the ^^ bare behef 
of the bare truth. '^ I will gladly permit Mr. 
Campbell to define it for me. " It is/' he says, ^^ a 
belief of testimony. It is a persuasion that God is 
true ; that the Gospel is divine ; that God is love ; 
and that Christ's death is the sinner's life. It is 
trust in God. It is a reliance upon his truth, his 
faithfulness, his power. It is not merely a cold as- 
sent to truth, to testimony ; but a cordial, joyful 
consent to it, and reception of it." Debate with 
Eice, p. 618. If this definition of faith does not 
harmonize with the views of faith elsewhere recorded 
by the same writer, that is no concern of mine. 
Now, this faith is the principle of a new, or spiritual 
hfe, involving reconciliation with God, and un- 
feigned submission to the authority of Christ. He 
who thus believes is, in the Scripture sense of the 
terms, converted, regenerated, a new creature. He 
was a rebel, but he is now a child, or, as Mr. 
Campbell says, '^ With it (faith) a man is a son of 
Abraham, a son of God ; an heir apparent to eternal 
life — an everlasting kingdom." p. 618. This joy- 
ful convert now obediently inquires, '^ Lord, what 
wilt thou have me to do ?'' God sees the change, 
approves it, and freely and instantly forgives the 
penitent believer, for Christ's sake. But, according 



230 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PrjNClPLES. 

to Mr. Campbell's theory^ this believer, who has 
given his '^ cordial, joyful consent to the" truth, 
this '^ son of God'' is condemned — exposed to 
" everlasting destruction from the presence of the 
Lord/'' until he performs the ^^ act of faith/' or 
until ^^ the very instant wlien he is put under the 
water'' 

If Christ and the apostles do not teach that the 
remission of sins, or justification, is suspended on 
faith, and not any act resulting from faith, I do not 
comprehend in what terms this instruction could be 
conveyed. But ^^ to the law, and to the testimony" 
— What saith the Scripture ? 

I answer, 

1. That throughout the Neic Testament , the re- 
mission of sins, or justification , is unequivocally 
and imconditionally J connected with faith, or with 
exercises ichich imply its existence. 

In confirmation of this position, I can furnish 
only specimens of the apposite declarations with 
which the Scriptures abound. 

Listen then, in the first place, to the testimony 
of the '' Teacher sent from Grod." In his memor- 
able nocturnal conversation with the Jewish Eabbi, 
Nicodemus, he employed this significant language : 
" He that belie veth on him (the Son of God) is not 
condemned, but he that believeth not, is condemned 
already, because he hath not believed in the name 
of the only begotten Son of God." John 3 : 18. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 231 

1 he Saviour here points out two opposite conditions 
— -a state of condemnation or guilt, and a state of 
freedom from condemnation, or justification. He 
testifies, and we are bound to receive his testimony, 
that the believer is in a state of justification, and 
the unbeliever in a state of condemnation. 

Let us now turn to the ^^ Acts of the Apostles,'^ 
and examine the sermons dictated by the spirit of 
inspiration, and addressed both to the Jews and the 
Gentiles. 

Peter shall be heard first. He healed a cripple 
at the gate of the Temple, called Beautiful. A 
multitude was quickly drawn together, in Solomon's 
porch, by the report of the miracle. Thus Peter 
addressed the assembly : '^ Eepent ye therefore, and 
be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.'' 
Acts 3 : 19. They were a company of sinners, 
needing to have their sins blotted out, or remitted. 
An inspired apostle stood before them, to guide 
them to the enjoyment of the ineffable blessing. 
^'Eepent," said he, change your minds, ^"^ and be 
converted," reform your lives, (and these exercises 
clearly imply faith,) ^^ that your sins may be blotted 
out." I cannot for a moment suppose that if they 
had complied with Peter's exhortation they w^ould 
have remained '^ unpardoned." 

We will hear this witness again. Instructed by 
a vision from Heaven, the Apostle went from Joppa 
to Cesarea^ to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. 



232 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 

Arriving, lie found Cornelius, the Centurian, with 
his kinsmen and near friends, convened to listen to 
his instructions. He preached to them Jesus — 
his resurrection, and his appointment to be ^^ the 
Judge of quick and dead/' '' To him,'' said Peter, 
'^ give all the Prophets witness, that through 
his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive 
remission of sins." Acts x : 43. Name is fre- 
quently put in the Scriptures for person, ^^ The 
name of the God of Jacob defend thee." Ps. xx : 
1. ^^ Thou hast a few names (persons) in Sardis 
which have not defiled their garments." Eev. iii : 
4. By the ^^ name of Christ" we are to understand 
the person of Christ, with his character, sufferings, 
and works. That the virtue of the name of Christ, 
to procure the remission of sins, is limited by bap- 
tism, is a mere conceit. Peter said to the cripple, 
^^ In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up 
and walk ; and he leaping up, stood and walked." 
And to the multitude, who were astonished at the 
miracle of healing, he said, '^ And his name, through 
faith in his name^ hath made this man strong, 
whom ye see." Acts iii : 6 and 12. If '' whoso- 
ever believeth in him" (Christ) does not receive re- 
mission of sins, I do not perceive how '^ the Pro- 
phets" can be vindicated from the charge of bearing 
false witness. But they did not testify falsely. 
'' Whosoever," without regard to rank, character, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 233 

clime^ or outward condition^ believeth in Christ, 
" SHALL RECEIVE remission of sins J' 

It is now time that we should listen to the tes- 
timony of the '^ Apostle of the Gentiles/' Paul was 
invited to address the Jews of Antioch in Pisidia, 
assembled in the Synagogue. " Christ crucified'' was, 
of course, his theme. ^^ Be it known unto you there- 
fore/' said the infallible teacher, " men and brethren, 
that through this man," the Holy One whom God 
had raised again, '4s preached unto you the forgive- 
ness of sins : and by him all that believe are justi- 
fied from all things, from which ye could not be 
justified by the law of Moses." Acts xiii : 38, 39. 
Never was testimony more explicit. It seems de- 
signed to answer every inquiry, and solve every 
difficulty on the momentous subject of justification. 
If the inquiry is, Through what channel do we re- 
ceive the remission of sins ? the Apostle answers, 
'' Through this man (Christ) is preached unto you 
the forgiveness of sins." Is the question, How is 
the privilege of justification enjoyed ? the reply 
is, " They that believe are justified." Do we ask, 
Are all believers justified, or only such as change 
their state by an overt act ? Paul answers empha- 
tically, all '' By him all that believe are justified." 

We will now direct our attention to the Apos- 
tolic epistles. Let us first open the letter '^ to all 
that be in Kome, beloved of God, called to be Saints." 
The chief design of Paul in writing this epistle was 



234 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

to elucidate and establish the evangelic doctrine 
of justification by faith, without the deeds of the 
law. Here, if any where, we may expect to find an 
explicit and satisfactory exposition of this subject. 
The writer could not, I should think, guided as he 
was by the spirit of inspiration, have omitted to 
mention, in the discussion, baptism, if its perform- 
ance were indispensable to justification. Such an 
omission would be unaccountable, if not unfaithful. 
The Apostle, having demonstrated that all men, 
both Jews and Gentiles, are guilty in the sight of 
God — that by the deeds of the law no flesh could 
be justified, proceeded to unfold, with great clear- 
ness and precision, the Gospel method of justifica- 
tion. ^^ For if Abraham,'' these are Paul's words, 
'^ were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory ; 
but not before God. For what saith the Scripture ? 
Abraham believed God, and it," Abraham's faith, 
^' was counted unto him for righteousness," or justifi- 
cation. '^Now to him that worketh is the reward not 
reckoned of grace, but of debt, But to him that 
worketh not," with a view to justification, '^ but be- 
lieveth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith,'^ 
not his baptism, ^^is counted for righteousness." 
Eom. iv : 2, 5. I know of no passage of Scrip- 
ture which, in so small a compass, developes, so 
clearly, God's plan of making sinners righteous, or 
of justifying the ungodly. Paul says to men, in 
effect, you are guilty — you deserve to perish in your 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 235 

sins — you cannot be justified by your own works — 
you cannot in any measure^ expiate your guilt — but 
God has graciously devised and revealed a scheme 
for the salvation of men. If they believe in Christ 
— cordially embrace him as their Saviour — their 
faith shall be counted^ or imputed to them for right- 
eousness — they shall be treated as if they were right- 
eous — not because their faith merits this privilege 
for them^ but because God justifies them freely by 
his grace, '^ through the redemption that is in Christ 
Jesus.'' 

Throughout this elaborate discussion of the sub- 
ject of justification, the apostle does not pen a single 
syllable on the influence of the " act of faith/^ or 
immersion, in securing this privilege. The best 
proof of this omission is furnished by the fact that 
Mr. Campbell, ingenious as he is in the selection of 
proof texts, does not venture to quote one from this 
epistle in support of his theory. And the omission 
is utterly at war with the doctrine that faith and 
baptism are equally necessary to obtain remission of 
sins or justification. 

I have barely time to cite a text from the epistle 
to the ^^ churches of Galatia,'' in which the truth 
contended for is distinctly and emphatically stated. 
'' We who are Jews by nature and not sinners of 
hhe Gentiles, knowing that a man is not justified by 
^he works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus 
Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that 



236 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not 
by the works of the law/' ii : 16. It would be easy 
to multiply quotations to prove that men are brought 
into a state of justification by faith in Christ ; but 
these specimens from the epistles must suiGfice. 

Perhaps it may be objected against the position 
under discussion, that the Apostle James affirms, 
'' that by works a man is justified, and not by faith 
only.'' ii : 24. To this objection I reply, the 
Apostle Paul no less pointedly declares, ^^ that a 
man is justified by faith, without the deeds of the 
law.'' Eom. iii : 28. If the language of these 
writers is to be understood without limitation, they, 
it seems to me, flatly contradict each other. But 
we must not charge the spirit of inspiration with 
folly. Paul manifestly writes of the evangelic scheme 
of justification. Works of every kind are excluded 
wholly from the merit of justification. Men are 
justified by faith, through the redemption which is 
in Christ, by free grace, without the meritorious in- 
fluence of works. The design of James is, to show 
that men are justified not by a dead, but living and 
fruitful faith. " What does it profit, my brethren, 
though a man say he hath faith, and have not works ? 
Can faith (such a faith) save him .^" Certainly not, 
'^ Faith, if it hath not works, is dead, (incapable of 
justifying,) being alone." It is no better than the 
faith of devils. '^ Was not Abraham, our father, 
justified by works, when he had offered Isaac, his 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 237 

son^ upon the altar ?'' But how did works justify 
Abraham ? Why, '' faith wrought with his works, 
and by works was faith made perfect'^ — exhibited 
as a living, fruitful faith. '^ And the Scripture was 
fulfilled, (verified) which saith, Abraham believed 
God, and (mark this,) it was imputed unto Mm for 
righteousness,'' 

Whether this be the correct solution of the diflfi- 
culty, is not material in this discussion. The ob- 
jection cannot avail the advocates of baptismal re- 
mission. '^ A man,'' says James, " is justified by 
works'' — not by baptism, but by works — an obedient 
life. In whatever sense the lano;ua2:e be understood, 
it effectually explodes the notion that the remission 
of sins, or justification, is obtained " in and through 
immersion.'^ 

II. That in many 'places in the New Testament 
spiritual blessings^ which imply the remission of 
sins J are positively promised to faith. 

In support of this position, I observe, 

1. That salvation is promised to faith. There- 
mission of sins is comprehended in salvation. Christ 
saves his people from their sins — from their guilt as 
well as their practice. A sinner saved and unpar-- 
doned is a manifest impossibility. If then salvation 
is enjoyed by faith, so is pardon. Hear what Paul 
says : " I am not ashamed of the Grospel of Christ : 
for it is the power of God unto salvation, to every 
one that believeth, to the Jew first, and also to the 



238 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

Greek/' Eom. 1 : 16. The Gospel is the power- 
ful and efficient means which God employs for sav- 
ing men. But to whom does its saving efficacy 
reach ? '' To every one that believeth.'' Does its 
saving power extend to all nations ? Tes^ '^ to the 
Jew first, and also to the Greek.'' 

Paul and Silas were committed to prison in the 
city of Philippi, for preaching the Gospel of Christ. 
God graciously and miraculously interposed for their 
rescue. A great earthquake shook the foundatiomi 
of the prison, and all the doors were opened, and 
every one's bands were loosed. The jailor, seized 
with a conviction of his guilt and danger, fell down 
before Paul and Silas, and said, '^ Sirs, what must 
I do to be saved .^" Never was a more important 
question propounded. Never was a more direct, 
explicit, and satisfactory answer given. ^^ Believe 
on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." 
And is it possible that these inspired men directed 
the anxious prison keeper to do that which, being 
performed, would have left him still in an unpar- 
doned, unsaved state ? Did they promise salvation 
to an exercise with which it is not essentially con- 
nected ? Surely not. 

2. Adoption into the family of God is the ijrivi^ 
lege of believers. That the remission of sins is in- 
separably united with this honor, I need hardly 
attempt to prove. To suppose that the sons of God 
are still unpardoned is a gross absurdity. That be- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 239 

lievers enjoy this high honor the evangelist John 
testifies. '' He (the Word) came unto his own^ and 
his own received him not. But as many as received 
him^ to them gave he power (right or privilege) to 
become the sons of God, even to them that believe 
on his name : which were born, not of blood, nor of 
the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of 
God.^' 1 : 11, 13. Or, as the passage is rendered 
by Dr. Campbell, '' But to as many as received him^ 
believing in his name, he granted the privilege of 
heing cliildren of God^ who derive their birth not 
from blood,'' &c. If God has graciously conferred 
on believers the privilege of being sons of God, who 
can disannul it ? 

3. Eternal life is distinctly promised to faith. 
To bestow eternal life on men '' dead in trespasses 
and sins,'' is the prime end of Messiah's mission on 
earth. '^lam come," said he, ^^ that they might 
have life, and that they might have it more abun- 
dantly." Every spiritual blessing is conferred in 
subservience to this benevolent design. Now listen 
to the teaching of Him who cannot lie. *^^ As Moses 
lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must 
the Son of man be lifted up ; that whosoever be- 
lieveth on him should not perish, but have eternal 
life." Jno. 3 : 14, 15. Now just as certainly as the 
Israelites, bitten by the fiery serpents, were healed 
by looking at the brazen serpent, on the pole, will 
^^ whosoever believeth" in Christ, gain eternal life. 



240 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

But you shall have testimony more explicit than 
this, if more explicit testimony can be. ^^ Verily, 
verily, I say unto you/^ these are the words of Christ 
to the captious Jews, '^ he that believe th on me 
hath everlasting life^'— not he may have, nor he 
shall have— but he hath everlasting life — he has 
within him the embryo of immortal life — ^^ being 
born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorrupt- 
tible, by the word of God which liveth and abideth 
forever/^ Jno. 6 : 47—1 Pet. 1 : 23. 

III. That privileges wliicli are inseparable from 
the remission of sins are frequently promised, in 
the New Testament, to exercises or graces that imply 
the existence of faith. 

I will proceed at once to confirm this proposition. 

1. The kingdom of Heaven, (which doubtless in- 
cludes all the blessings of the kingdom — the remis- 
sion of sins, among the rest,) is promised to humility, 
'^ Blessed,'' said Jesus, in his inimitable sermon on 
the mount, ^^ are the poor in spirit : for theirs is" 
• — not may be or shall be, but is already, ^^ the king- 
dom of Heaven/' Mat. 5 : 3 — see also to v. 11. 

2. Salvation is promised to prayer, ^^ For who- 
soever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be 
saved." Rom. 10 : 13. Salvation includes, as has 
been already stated, the remission of sins. It is 
promised to him who " shall call on the name of the 
Lord." This promise is not made to a heartless, 
hypocritical calling on the Lord. '^ This people," 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 241 

said the Son of God, ^^ draweth nigh, to me with their 
mouth, and honoreth me with their lips ; but their 
heart is far from me/' But the promise is made 
to sincere, beheving prayer — to such as ^^ call on the 
Lord out of a pure heart'' — to such as pray, ^^ lifting 
up holy hands, without wrath and doubting." 1 
Tim. 2:8. ^^ For without faith it is impossible to 
please God." Heb. 11 : 6. ^' How then shall they 
call on him in whom they have not believed ?'' 

3. Adoption, which supposes the remission of 
sins, is declared to be the privilege of such persons 
as follow the guidance of the Spirit. '^ For as many 
as are led by the Spirit of God,'" (and if those who 
repent and believe the Gospel are not led by the 
Spirit of God, by what spirit are they led ?) '' they 
are the sons of God!' Eom. 8 : 14. Perhaps it may 
be replied that the Spirit of the Lord will lead men 
to an observance of the Christian ordinances. I 
grant it. And he will lead those persons under his 
influence '^ all the length of the celestial road.'' 
But when do they become the sons of God ? Not 
till they reach the end of their journey, or at the 
middle of it — or in the commencement of it ? At 
the beginning surely. Otherwise it would not be 
true that ^^ as many as are led by the Spirit of 
God," — ^but such only as have traveled the pre- 
scribed distance — ^^ are the sons of God," 

IV. That the remission of sins was, in various 



242 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

caseSy possessed and enjoyed hy faithy without^ or 
before baptism. This we can clearly show. 

Jesus was crucified between two malefactors. 
One of them railed on him. The other, touched with 
compunction at the remembrance of his crimes, said 
unto Jesus, (and this prayer implied faith,) ^^Lord, 
remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.'^ 
Jesus replied to him, long after he had said to 
Nicodemus, ^^ Except a man be born of water and 
of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of 
God,'' '^ To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise;'' 
and he certainly did not go to Paradise in his sins. 
Luke 23 : 39, 43. Perhaps it maybe said that this 
was an extraordinary case. Then, let us examine 
another instance. 

The pubHcan went up to the temple to pray, and 
^^ standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his 
eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, (con- 
scious of his guilt,) saying, (and this prayer evi- 
dently was the '^ prayer of faith,") God be merciful 
to me a sinner." And did God hear the prayer of 
this penitent believer and remit his sins ? Yes ! 
'^ This man went down to his house (not baptized^ 
hut) Justified rather than the other." Luke 18 : 10, 
14. So true it is, that '^ a broken and contrite 
heart" God will not despise. Possibly it may be 
objected (though the objection is, in my view, of no 
validity,) that these cases occurred before the giving 
of the apostolic commission. Well, then, to silence 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 243 

the last objection^ let us select another and an 
apposite case. 

I have already adverted to the conversion of Cor- 
nelius and his friends ; but I must again recur to 
the interesting subject. "While Peter was uttering 
these memorable words, '^ To him (Jesus) give all 
the prophets witness, that through his name who- 
soever believeth in him shall receive remission of 
sins/' ^^ the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard 
the words /' and they began to ^^ speak with tongues 
and to magnify God.'' It is not affirmed by 
the historian that these Gentile converts were for- 
given before their baptism ; but consider carefully 
the facts of the case. Peter affirmed that whosoever 
believeth in Christ (the Gentile as well as the Jew,) 
shall receive remission of sins. In attestation of this 
truth the Holy Ghost was poured on all the hear- 
ers ; that is, they were copiously endowed with the 
miraculous gifts of the Spirit. Now, I ask, can any 
man in his sober senses, and whose mind is not 
warped by theory, believe that these Gentile con- 
verts were '' baptized with the Holy Ghost," Acts 
11 : 16, while they were yet in their sins, with the 
wrath of God abiding on them ? The Jewish con- 
verts censured Peter because he went in to men 
uncircumcised, and did eat with them. The apostle 
triumphantly vindicated his conduct. " Foras- 
much," said he, '^ as God gave unto them the like 
gift as he did unto us who believed on the Lord 



244 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

Jesus Clirist, what was I, that I could withstand 
God ?" Acts 11 : 17. When he saw that God had 
received the Gentiles to his favor^ his Jewish preju- 
dices were slain^ and he inquired^ '^ Can any man 
forbid water, that these should not be baptized/' 
not in order to receive, either the remission of their 
sins, or the gift of the Holy Ghost, but who '' have 
received the Holy Ghost,'' and by fair inference the 
forgiveness of their sins ? Acts 10 : 43, 48. I 
know not what impression this case may make on 
other minds ; but to my own mind it furnishes a 
conclusive refutation of the dogma, that we have 
the remission of '^ sins in and through immersion." 

'^ Many blessings," says the Eeformer, '' are 
metonymically ascribed to faith, in the sacred writ- 
ings." Metonymy is " a trope in which one word 
is put for another." But for what word is faith put ? 
We know not, and he has not informed us. He 
continues — '^ We are said to be justified, sanctified, 
and purified by faith — to w^alk by faith, and to live 
by faith, &c., &c. But these sayings, as qualified 
by the apostles, mean no more than by believing 
the truth of God, we have access into all these bless- 
ings." Chn'ty Restored, p. 198. Is this all? 
When Christ asserts that, '^ He that belie veth on 
the Son hath everlasting life," does he mean, not 
that he has the germ, or assurance of life, but merely 
access to it ? When he affirms, that the believer 
" is not condemned," does he mean simply to teach, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 245 

that lie is condemned^ but has access to a state of 
justification ? When Paul declares that ^^ faith is 
counted for righteousness/' does he mean that faith 
is not counted for righteousness, but the believer is 
in a condition, in which, by performing an '^ overt 
act/' he may have access to this blessing ? Mr. 
Campbell asserts, but does not prove his position. 

I must notice what he considers a conclusive re- 
futation of all the arguments of his opponents in 
support of the doctrine of justification by faith, pre- 
viously to baptism. '' When they find,'' he says, 
" where remission of sins is mentioned without im- 
mersion, it is weak^ it is unfair, in the extreme, to 
argue from that, that forgiveness can be enjoyed 
without immersion. If their logic he worth any 
thing ^ it will prove^ that a man may he forgiven, 
without grace J the hlood of Jesus ^ and without faith ; 
for we can find passages ^ many passages ^ where 
remission^ or justification^ sanctification, or some 
similar term occurs, and no mention of either grace, 
faith, or the hlood of Jesus/' Chn'ty Eestored, 
p. 217. 

The italicised sentence above, on account of its 
supposed importance, is printed by its author in 
bold capitals. A few remarks will suffice to show 
the feebleness of this objection. Faith is indis- 
soluhly united luith grace and the hlood of Christ, 
The blood of Christ is the object of saving faith. 
"• Whom (Christ) God hath set forth to be a propi- 



246 CAMPBELLISil IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

tiation through faith in his hloodj to declare his 
righteousness for the remission of sins/' &c. Kom. 
3 : 25. Faith is the product of grace, and through 
grace faith is imputed for righteousness. Eom. 4 : 
3-5. Faith implies — is inseparable from — repent- 
ance^ conversion, holiness. Now, suppose remis- 
sion, or justification is, in many passages, promised, 
where no mention is made of '' either grace, faith, 
or the blood of Jesus ;'' the blessing is promised to 
some holy exercise or quality which implies the ex- 
istence of faith ^ and is inseparably united to grace 
and the blood of Christ, But, mark this ! bap)tism 
is not essentially connected with faith^ nor with any 
of the exercises which suppose the existence of faith. 
A man must be a believer, in the full, Scriptural 
sense of the term, before he is a fit subject of bap- 
tism. A period longer or shorter, must elapse be- 
tween the moment of believing and the moment of 
immersion. Nay, there is no certainty, there can 
be none, that immersion will ever follow the act of 
believing. The sum of the matter is this, when re- 
mission or justification is promised to faith, then re- 
pentance, conversion, the new birth, holiness, the 
spirit of obedience, the grace of God, and the blood 
of Christ, are implied — are all indissolubly united. 
But neither baptism^ nor a participation in the 
Lord's supper^ is supposed in the p)romise, nor es- 
sentially connected with the blessing. 

The wisdom and grace of Grod are eminently 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 247 

manifested in making faith, and not immersion, the 
line of discrimination between the states of con- 
demnation and justification. It is a line invisible 
to us, but not to God. It marks the precise point 
at which the rebel becomes a child — It is the com- 
mencement of spiritual life — and is the source of 
all true obedience. '^ Indeed, true faith necessarily 
works ; therefore, a working faith is the only true, 
real, and proper faith in Divine or human esteem."' 
Campbell on Baptism, p. 282. It is inseparable 
from conversion, or regeneration, and an exercise 
acceptable to God. Let us hear the opinion of the 
Eeformer on this point. ^^ Now as faith in God is 
the first principle — the soul-renewing principle of 
religion ; as it is the regenerating, justifying, sanc- 
tifying principle ; without it, it is impossible to 
please God. With it,'' I must repeat this sentence, 
^^a man is a son of AhraJiam^ a son of God ; an 
heir apparent to eternal life^ But on this subject 
I can furnish higher authority than that of Mr. 
Campbell. The Apostle John says, ^^ Whosoever 
helieveth that Jesus is the Christy is horn of God^ 
1 John 5:1. Now, in view of the excellent nature, 
and momentous relations of faith, does it not seem 
most worthy of God, and most suitable to man, 
that it should be the exercise to which the remis- 
sion of sins, and eternal life are promised ? Can 
^^ a son of Abraham, a son of God," be still in a 
state of condemnation ? Even Mr. Campbell, who 



248 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

once maintained so strenuously, that a man cannot 
be born of God, until lie is born of water, is con- 
strained to admit, '^ that to he horn of Godj and 
horn in sin^ is inconceivahle. Remission of sins,^' 
lie says, ^^ is as certainly granted to the horn of 
Oodj as life eternal, and deliverance from corrup- 
tion, will be granted to the children of the resurrec- 
tion, when born from the grave/' Christianity Re- 
stored, p. 208. If then the believer is " a son of 
God,'' as Mr. Campbell in one place testifies, and 
as the Scriptures distinctly teach, it is a monstrous 
supposition, at war alike with our conceptions of 
the evangelical scheme of justification, and the char- 
acter of the Supreme Ruler, that he is in his sins, 
until he can perform '^ an overt act,'' which he may 
never be able to do. 

It must, however, be conceded that there is a 
connexion hetween haptism and the remission of 
sins. In some sense haptism tuashes away sins. 
I purpose to inquire what this connexion is ? 

Baptism must either be the means, or the condi- 
tion of ohtaining the remission of sins ; or it is the 
means of declaring, or confessing, the remission of 
sins, previously obtained by faith. Either it sus- 
tains a relation to forgiveness like that which 
repentance and faith sustain ; or its relation to for- 
giveness is that of a sign to the thing signified. 

There is no medium between these schemes. The 
Rev. Mr. Meredith, the late estimable editor of the 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 249 

Biblical Recorder J labored hard, ingeniously, but 
unsuccessfully, to establish an intermediate scheme. 
But in spite of the most subtle distinctions, we are 
forced to the conclusion, either that baptism is an 
act upon the proper performance of which God has 
promised that forgiveness shall ensue, and without 
such performance there is no promise of forgiveness ; 
or that baptism is a sign or declaration of forgive- 
ness actually received and enjoyed by faith in Christ. 

Mr. Campbell without dispute embraces the 
former scheme. Baptism, according to the ^^ ancient 
Gospel,'' is not the figure or formal acknowledgment 
of the remission of sins, but the indispensable, and, 
it would seem, the only condition of obtaining it. 
'^ I assert,'' he says, and truly, it is mere assertion, 
^^ that there is but one action ordained or command- 
ed in the New Testament, to which God has 
promised, or testified, that he will forgive our sins. 
This action is Christian immersion." Chn. Bap., 
p. 520. 

Is this scheme of forgiveness Scriptural ? Is 
haptisnij like repentance and faith, an indisjpensahle 
condition of the remission of sins ? 

Let the reader notice — First. That this scheme 
of remission flatly contradicts plain and numerous 
Scripture testimonies. These testimonies, or speci- 
mens of them, I have already adduced. Now, it^s 
a sound and admitted principle of Biblical interpre- 
tation, that the Scriptures should be construed in 



250 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES 

harmony with themselves. The obscure must be 
elucidated by the clear, and the figurative by the 
literal. It is impossible for words to express more 
clearly, pointedly, and emphatically, than do the 
Scriptures, that God has suspended the forgiveness 
of sins on the exercise of faith. Take for an illus- 
tration the words of Christ to the Jewish Eabbi — 
^' He that believeth on him (the Son) is not con- 
demned/' and is consequently, pardoned, or justified. 
Now, ^^ baptism for the remission of sins,'' a phrase 
susceptible of difi'erent interpretations, must be con- 
strued in harmony with this unambiguous language 
of the great Teacher. And the remark is true of 
all the texts under consideration. 

Secondly, That the Scriptures manifestly make 
a distinction between the relation which faith, and 
that which baptism bears to the remission of sins. 
We read in the Scriptures, and many such passages 
may be found, '' He that believeth not shall be 
damned.^' '' Except ye repent, ye shall ail likewise 
perish.'' ^^ If any man love not the Lord Jesus 
Christ, let him be anathema maran-atha." Now, 
we do not read, nor is it intimated, nor is any thing 
recorded, from which it may be fairly inferred, that 
if a man is not immersed, he is condemned, doomed 
to perish — and to be anathematized at the coming 
pf our Lord. But if Christ has made, as Mr. Camp- 
bell contends, repentance, faith, and immersion 
'^ equally necessary to forgiveness," how can it be 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 251 

accounted for, that neither Christ nor his apostles 
ever uttered a malediction against the unbaptized ? 
How can their silence on this point be reconciled 
with their love and fidelity to the souls of men, and 
at the same time with the doctrine that the peni- 
tent believer, glowing with love to Jesus, is under 
the curse, until he is immersed ? 

Thirdly, There are consequences involved in the 
theory of baptismal remission which may well make 
us hesitate to adopt it. God has a perfect right to 
prescribe the conditions of forgiveness ; and we are 
bound to receive, with readiness and gratitude, such 
as he may prescribe. But when any interpretation 
of the divinely prescribed terms of forgiveness leads 
to conclusions, absurd in themselves, at variance 
with the genius of the Gospel, and seemingly deroga- 
tory to God, we certainly should hesitate long, and 
examine carefully, before we adopt it. The conclu- 
sions, logically deducible from the doctrine of bap- 
tismal remission, are such as to make me believe 
that it is based on a misinterpretation of the Scrip- 
tures. 

Let us now seriously notice some of the legitimate 
consequences of the dogma which I am combating. 

If the remission of sins is enjoyed only through 
immersion ; or, in other words, if ^^ baptism is the 
only medium divinely appointed, through which the 
efficacy of the blood of Christ is communicated to 
the conscience,'' then, I remark, 



252 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS "PKINCIPLES. 

1. That the salvation of men^ even of penitent 
believers, is in the hands of the authorized baptizers. 
Popish priests have claimed the power of remitting 
sins ; but Protestants have ever considered the claim 
an arrogant assumption. I freely concede that those 
who maintain the sentiment which I am opposing 
may not have examined its bearing and consequences. 
I speak not of them, but of their doctrine. It is, 
however, as clear as that two and two make four, 
that the remission of the believer^s sins, according 
to this theory, depends, not on the will of God, but 
on the will of man. He cannot baptize himself ; 
and if the qualified administrator does not choose, 
under no matter what plea, to baptize, (or regener- 
ate) him, he must either be pardoned without im- 
mersion, be saved without pardon, or be lost. No 
soj)histry can evade this consequence. 

2. That salvation may be entirely beyond the 
reach of the most humble, obedient and faithful ser- 
vants of Christ. Let me suppose a case. Fidelis, 
after a careful examination of the subject, became a 
convert to Christianity. Deeply conscious of his 
guilt and un worthiness, he cordially embraced Christ, 
as his prophet, priest, and king ; consecrating to 
him, in the unfeigned purpose of his heart, his body, 
soul, and spirit ; with all his time, and all his pos- 
sessions. , Enraptured with the Saviour's charms, 
he rejoiced in his word a.nd worship from day to day. 
Having settled his views on the subject of baptism, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 253 

he designed^ at the earliest opportunity, to take on 
him the badge of discipleship in baptism. But, by- 
order of Tyrannus, an inveterate enemy to Christ, 
he was arrested and cast into prison, for his ardent 
zeal, and dauntless testimony in the Kedeemer's 
cause. To him baptism is now impossible. And 
poor Fidelis cannot enjoy the remission of his sins. 
Perhaps, it may be replied, '^ That God is merciful 
— that he does not require impossibilities — and that 
he may accept the will for the deed.'' These are 
the very considerations which make me suspect that 
God has not suspended the remission of sins on that 
which to a good man may be impracticable — on 
something extraneous to the new creature. Besides 
the persecuted Fidelis needs something more solid 
than a ^^ perhaps,'' a " may be," or a conjecture, to 
support him in his dark and solitary confinement ; 
God has not withheld the stable ground of comfort, 
as I have clearly evinced. 

3. That the enlightened and tender conscience 
can never be fully satisfied. Questions as to the 
validity, and sin-cleansing efficacy of baptism must 
arise. I can easily know when I have passed from 
Virginia into Ohio, because they are separated by 
water. I may certainly know that I have been im- 
mersed ; but whether I have received valid, re- 
generating baptism, is another matter. Does its 
efficacy depend on the qualifications of the adminis- 
trator ? on his piety .^ on his baptism? on his church 



254 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

connexion ? on his ordination ? on his intention ? 
Is apostolical succession, either in the line of bap- 
tism or of ordination, essential to its validity ? Is 
its sin pardoning virtue connected with the views 
entertained of it by the subject ? If " baptism is 
the only medium divinely appointed, through which 
the efl&cacy of the blood of Christ is communicated 
to the conscience/'^ then, it would seem to me, that 
the believer, tremblingly alive to his own salvation, 
must be filled with intense and ceaseless dread, lest 
the channel^ through some defect, or leak, should 
permit the grace of pardon to escape before it 
reaches his sin-smitten conscience. Indeed, some 
have been goaded by this very apprehension to a 
repetition of the ordinance. 

4. That repentance, the most sincere and lasting 
— faith, the most vigorous — love, the most self- 
sacrificing — the sanctifying influence of the Holy 
Spirit — the atoning blood of Christ — his intercession 
before the throne — and the abounding grace of the 
Father, are all, without baptism, unavailing for sal- 
vation. I do not affirm that all who adopt the 
sentiment which I am combating, push it to this 
extent, but I fearlessly aver that this is its plain, 
legitimate, and inevitable consequence. This gives 
to baptism an unscriptural prominence in the Chris- 
tian system. It must tend, as the kindred dogma 
of transubstantiation has tended among Papists, to 
engender superstition. At first the water of bap- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 255 

tism is deemed of equal moment in the scheme of 
salvation with the cleansing blood of the Eedeemer ; 
and by degrees the sign will come to be substituted 
for the thing signified — the ceremonial to be pre- 
ferred to the vital. What has occurred may occur 
again. Strange as it may appear^ the error which 
I have been exposing, is the root of infant baptism. 
We learn from Salmasius, a learned historian and 
critic, quoted by Booth in his Paedobaptism Ex- 
amined, that among the ancients, '^ an opinion pre- 
vailed that no one could be saved without being 
baptized ; and for that reason, the custom arose of 
baptizing infants.'' This error had its origin, 
according to the testimony of Suiceras, a learned 
divine and professor of Greek and Hebrew at Zurich, 
(quoted by the same indefatigable inquirer after 
truth,) in a ^^ wrong understanding of our Lord's 
words, except a man he horn of water and of the 
Spirit J he cannot enter into the hingdom of heaven.^' 

^^ It (infant baptism) arose from false views of ori- 
ginal sin, and of the magical power of consecrated 
water.'' Prof. Hahn's Theology, p. 556. 

^' The immediate occasion of infant baptism, it 
cannot he denied^ was extravagant ideas of its neces- 
sity to salvation." Dressler's Doctrine of the Sacra- 
ment of Baptism, p. 152. Chris. Eeview, June, 
1838, p. 198, 199. 

I can easily conceive the influence of this error on 
ignorant and superstitious people. If baptism be 



256 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 

deemed essential to salvation^ the motive to extend 
its efficacy to every individual who mighty by pos- 
sibility^ be qualified to receive it, is irresistible. It 
V7ould be administered first to the sick — then to 
persons of very tender age — then to children, whose 
capacity for the exercise of faith is very doubtful — 
and finally to unconscious infants. The considera- 
tion that none could be saved without baptism, and 
that its performance could do no serious injury, 
would lead from step to step in the path of error, 
till the design and spirit of the ordinance would be 
lost and forgotten. I inquire — 

5. What will be the condition of a believer dying 
without baptism ? I have already shown conclu- 
sively that the believer is '^ born of Grod'' — that he 
possesses " everlasting life,'' and that he is a child, 
of God ; and yet, agreeably to the theory under con- 
sideration, ^^ unpardoned, unjustified, unsaved,'' &c. 
In this condition he may unquestionably die. What 
would become of him ? He could not be received 
into heaven without pardon, and consequently in 
his sins ; nor would he be sent to perdition, with a 
regenerate heart, and possessing eternal life. There 
would be no place for him but purgatory. And yet, 
in the opinion of Protestants, there is no such place 
as purgatory. I leave him to be extricated from 
his dilemma by those whose unscriptural, I had 
almost said absurd, dogma has placed him in it. 

Lastly. Mr. Campbell recoils from the conse- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 257 

quences of his own doctrine. If, as he maintains, 
Peter ^'^made repentance, or reformation, and im- 
mersion equally necessary to forgiveness j' then it is 
as clear as the noon-day sun, that no man can be a 
Christian, and no man who hears, or has an oppor- 
tunity of hearing the Grospel, can be saved, in time 
or eternity, without immersion. Can a man be a 
Christian without repentance ? Can a man, under 
the light of the Gospel, be saved without repent- 
ance ? Mr. Campbell will hardly answer these 
questions in the affirmative. But if immersion and 
repentance are equally necessary to forgiveness, then 
no man can be a Christian, or be saved, without 
immersion, except, indeed, a man may be a Chris- 
tian or be saved, without forgiveness. Mr. Camp- 
bell seems sometimes half inclined to look this 
consequence full in the face. '^ Infants,'' he says, 
'' idiots, deaf and dumb persons, innocent Pagans, 
wherever they can be found, with all the pious 
Pcedobaptists, we commend to the mercy of God.'' 
Chn. Sys., 233. As there is no promise of their 
salvation, he turns over all pious Paedobaptists, 
and, of course, all other unimmersed believers, with 
infants, idiots, &c., to the " uncovenanted mercies 
of God." At another time, when a milder spirit 
rules him, or, more probably, when his system is 
out of view, he writes, in a measure, like an unre- 
/o7^mec^ Christian minister. ^^ Amongst them all," 
he says, alluding to the Christian sects, ^' we thank 



258 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 

the grace of God, that there are many who believe 
in, and love the Saviour, and that, though we may 
not have Christian churches, we have many Chris- 
tians/' Camp, on Baptism, p. 16. Yes ! thanks 
to ^' the grace of God,'' we have '^ many Christians ^'^ 
without immersion, without conversion, without re- 
generation, and without the remission of sins ! ! It 
is exceedingly difficult for error to be consistent with 
itself. Mr. Campbell shows in this admission that 
he does not fully believe his own doctrine. He is 
forced, in spite of his system, to concede that repent- 
ance and immersion, are not equally necessary to 
secure the remission of sins. 

If baptism, as I have endeavored to show, is not 
a condition, or means of obtaining the remission of 
sin, then it follows that it is a symbolic declaration 
of the remission of sins already obtained through 
faith in Christ. In support of this conclusion, I 
remark. 

First — That it is in perfect harmony with the 
teaching of the Scriptures. This point has been 
sufficiently elucidated, and the reader must judge 
of it for himself. 

Secondly — That it is according to analogy. There 
are two New Testament institutions — ^baptism and 
the Lord's supper. The latter is unquestionably a 
symbolic ordinance. Bread and wine are used to 
symbolize the broken body, and sin-atoning blood of 
Jesus. May we not reasonably infer that both ordi- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 259 

nances are of the same general nature — that as one 
is symbolic so is the other ? If we do not literally^ 
but only in a figure eat the Lord's body^ and drink 
his blood, in the supper, does it not seem probable 
that our sins are not literally, but only in a figure, 
washed away in baptism ? As we do not derogate 
from the importance of the Lord's supper, but as- 
sign to it its true position in the Christian system, 
as a means of promoting the edification and piety 
of believers, by insisting on its symbolic character ; 
so neither do we derogate from the scriptural im- 
portance of baptism, by maintaining that sins are 
not literally but only in a figure remitted by it. 
The Papists interpret the language relating to the 
Christian ordinances with perfect consistency. 
They carry out the principle of a literal exposition. 
They maintain that in the eucharist the body of 
Christ is literally eaten, and his blood literally 
drunk, and that in baptism sins are literally washed 
away. But are they consistent expositors of Scrip- 
ture who teach that in the eucharist we eat the 
body, and drink the blood of Christ in a figure, but 
that in baptism our sins are literally, really washed 
away ? I think not. In the same sense in which 
the broken loaf in the Lord's supper is a sign of the 
crucified body of Jesus, is the water of baptism a 
sign of the cleansing efficacy of the blood, or 
atonement of Christ. In like manner as we eat the 



260 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

body of Clirist in tlie supper, do we wash away our 
sins in baptism. 

Thirdly — That it is in harmony with what Paul 
affirms of himself. 1 Cor. 1 : 17. '' Christ sent 
me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel.'' The 
apostle did not mean that he was unauthorized to 
perform the rite of baptism ; for he baptized 
Crispus and Gains, and the household of Stephanus, 
and perhaps some others ; and he would not have 
baptized them without authority. The commission 
to preach is co-extensive with the commission to 
baptize. The apostle clearly meant, " Christ sent 
me not (mainly) to baptize, but to preach the Gos- 
pel.'' Baptism was not unimportant — it was a 
solemn duty — an impressive ordinance — a symbolic 
rite ; but preaching the Gospel was the great, su- 
preme business of Paul, as it should be of every 
Christian minister. If, however, baptism is the re- 
generating act, and as essential to forgiveness as re- 
pentance, I ask any candid and discerning man, 
whether Paul could have used such language ? '^ I 
thank God," said he, ^^I baptized (regenerated) 
none of you but Crispus and Gains." Thank God 
I did not do the very thing without which my 
preaching is vain — ^your faith is vain — and your sins 
cannot be forgiven ! His language is most dis- 
cordant with the theory of baptismal remission ; 
but strikingly harmonizes with the conclusion I am 
aiming to establish. The blood of Christ — the 



GAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 261 

publication of the Gospel— the influence of the 
Holy Spirit — repentance— faith — regeneration — aro 
indispensable to salvation ; and baptism is an open^ 
solemn acknowledgment^ or declaration that salva- 
tion is received and enjoyed^ through the blood of 
Christy by repentance and faith^ produced through 
the agency of the Holy Spirit. 

I will now endeavor briefly to show that the pas- 
sages of Scripture principally relied on by Mr. 
Campbell for the support of his doctrine^ utterly 
fail of establishing it^ and are in agreement with the 
theory of symbolic remission maintained in this 
chapter. 

To begin with the commission^ Mark 16 : 16. 
The assurance that '' He that helieveth and is bap- 
tized shall he saved^'^ does by no means warrant the 
conclusion that the remission of sins does not pre- 
cede baptism. There is perfect accordance between 
this promise and the plain^ literal declaration of 
Jesus, that " He that believeth on the Son is not 
condemned.'' Certainly, if he that believes on the 
Son is not condemned, he who not only believes in 
the Son, but, in submission to his authority, is bap- 
tized, is not condemned. 

Let us next notice the famous passage in this con- 
troversy. Acts 2 : 38. ^^ Bepent and he baptized 
every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, /or 
the remission of sins^ and ye shall receive the gift 
of the Holy Ghost.'' That baptism is for the re- 



262 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

mission of sins none will deny. But tlie import of 
the passage turns on the force of the term ^'for'' 
In the Grreek the preposition eig is used. Every 
scholar knows^ and every intelligent reader may 
learn from unquestionable authority, that it bears 
in the New Testament various meanings. It is 
sometimes, but rarely^ rendered /or, in the sense of, 
^' in order to'' Its usual rendering is into, A 
regard to the context, the sense of the passage, and 
other considerations, must determine its import in 
any particular place. It is only necessary to show 
that on sound principles of hermeneutics, it may be 
fairly understood in harmony with what I have en- 
deavored to prove is the plain doctrine of the 
Scriptures, and this can easily be done. In Mat. 
3 : 11, we have these words — ^^I indeed baptize 
you with water unto {^k) repentance.'' Here the 
term cannot without gross impropriety be rendered 
/or, or in order to. We know that John did not 
baptize his disciples in order that they might re- 
pent. He demanded of them not only repentance, 
but fruits meet for repentance, before he admitted 
them to baptism. He baptized them, not that they 
might obtain repentance, but as a sign, or acknow- 
ledgment that they had repented. Mat. 3 : 8-9. 
Now, in the very sense in which the Harbinger bap- 
tized his disciples [^k) unto, for, into repentance, 
did Peter command his pentecostal hearers to be 
baptized {dg) for, unto, into the remission of sins — 



OAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 263 

that is, not to procure, but as a sign, or acknowl- 
edgment of, this privilege, which God has graciously 
and inseparably united with repentance and faith. 
I could produce many similar examples, but this 
will suffice to show how fairly the passage harmo- 
nizes with the symbolic theory of baptism. 

On Acts 22 : 16, it is needless to add any thing 
to the remarks which I have already made on the 
figurative import of the ordinance. 

^^ Jesus answered, verily, verily, I say unto thee, 
Except a man he horn of water ^ and of the Spirit ^ he 
cannot enter into the kingdom of God!' John 3 : 5. 

The Keformers quote this text with great confi- 
dence in support of their views. Let us candidly 
examine it. The phrase 7evz^?7^£^^t5(5aroc—^' born 
of water,^^ does not elsewhere occur in the Scrip- 
tures. Its import must be learned from the lan- 
guage itself, the context, and the current teaching 
of revelation. What is its meaning ? Mr. Camp- 
bell maintains that it means baptism, and founds 
his argument for baptismal remission wholly on this 
interpretation. Concerning this opinion^ I have 
several remarks to offer-^ 

First, It is perfectly gratuitous. No argument 
has been presented, and none, it is presumed, can 
be, in its support. All that can be plausibly said 
in favor of it is, that if the phrase does not mean 
baptism, it is not easy to perceive what it does mean. 



264 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

Now I protest against building so important a theory 
as baptismal remission on a mere assumption. 

Secondly. Mr. Campbell relies on authoi^ity for 
the confirmation of bis opinion. '^ This/' be says, 
^^ is neither an interpretation of my own, nor of 
modern times ; but if ever there was a Catholic in- 
terpretation — not Eoman Catholic or Greek Catholic 
—but if ever there was a Catholic interpretation, it 
is the interpretation which I have given ; for all 
agree to it, both ancient and modern.'^ Debate with 
Kice, p. 481. It must be conceded that the pre- 
ponderance of authority is in favor of this interjDre- 
tation. This, however, is only a part of the truth. 
A majority of ^^ ancient and modern'' writers, espe- 
cially of the '^ Greek and Latin Fathers,'' on whose 
concurrent judgment Mr. C. relies for the support 
of his interpretation, cast the weight of their au- 
thority not only in favor of baptismal remission, 
which he believes, but of baptismal regeneration^ 
which he rejects. This text is the stronghold of the 
doctrine. A misconception of its meaning was the 
root of that most prevalent error, infant baptism. 
Besides, no man has less respect for human author- 
ity than Mr. Campbell, when it is in conflict with 
his own views. 

Tkirdly. It makes Christ's answer to Nicodemus 
irrelevant. The Saviour said to the Eabbi, '' Verily, 
verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, 
he cannot see the kingdom of God." The Jewish 



OAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 265 

ruler did not understand the language — attached a 
gross, sensual meaning to it — and demanded an ex- 
planation of it. ^^ How/' said he, ^^ can these 
things be ?" According to the popular interpreta- 
tion, Christ, instead of answering the question, 
merely combined with the obscure proposition^ an- 
other, which must have been perfectly unintelligible 
to Nicodemus. If the great Teacher employed a 
figurative phrase, well understood among the intel- 
ligent Jewish rulers, to elucidate the nature of the 
spiritual birth, his answer was in harmony with the 
question of Nicodemus, and the whole context ; but 
if he used a phrase never before nor afterwards em- 
ployed, by an inspired teacher, to denote baptism, 
his language was adapted to confound rather than 
instruct the neophyte. 

Fourthly, It fully justifies the ignorance of the 
Jewish ruler. I take it for granted, that Christ in- 
tended to be understood by Nicodemus, and used 
such language as a suitably qualified ruler of the 
Jews could have comprehended. Christ reproved 
his pupil for his inexcusable ignorance— ^^ Art thou 
a master of Israel, and knowest not these things ?'' 
But how could a teacher in Israel be censurable for 
not understanding phrases peculiar to Christianity 
— UA.y, a doctrine which had never before been enun- 
ciated ? If Christ meant to teach Nicodemus that 
he must be baptized before he could enter into the 
kingdom of God, he employed la,nguage which it 



266 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

was impossible for the ruler to comprehend^ and 
then reproved him for his ofl&cial ignorance. But 
Christ did not reprove the master unjustly. He 
ought as a Jewish teacher^ and as a student of the 
Scriptures^ and of Rabbinical writings, to have un- 
derstood the language used by the Redeemer for 
illustrating the nature of the new birth. 

Fifthly, It makes the answer of Christ to Nico- 
demus/a?5ei The ''kingdom of God'' must mean 
the church of Christ — on earth, or the state of 
heavenly glory. This position, it is presumed, will 
not be called in question. Now it is not true that 
none enter into the visible church on earth, who are 
not born of the Spirit. In the purest churches 
there are members who are not regenerated. In 
the apostolic churches, there were some who were 
not properly of them. " They went out from us,^' 
said John, '' but they were not of us ; for if they 
had been of us, they would have continued with us.'" 
1 Jno. 2 : 19. The kingdom of heaven is like a net, 
which gathers both good and bad. Mat. 13 : 47-48. 
Nor is it true, that none enter into the heavenly 
glory who are not baptized. From this conclusion, 
though it follows legitimately from his doctrine, Mr. 
Campbell himself recoils. Tlie Saviour's declara- 
tion then, as interpreted by the Reformers, and 
many others, is not true. There is but one method 
of evading this conclusion. It is sometimes affirmed, 
for the purpose of avoiding it, that a man cannot 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 267 

constitutionally enter into the kingdom of God^ ex- 
cept he is baptized, and born of the Spirit. But, 
by what authority is this long word foisted in the 
passage ? There is nothing in the context to jus- 
tify its insertion. Christ affirms positively, and 
without limitation, ^^ Except a man be born of 
water, and of the Spirit^ he cannot enter into the 
kingdom of God.'' 

Lastly,— li the phrase ^^born of water" means 
immeo'-sionj the passage in which it is found yields 
no support to the doctrine of baptismal remission. 
If the '^ kingdom of God '' means, as Mr. Campbell 
understands it to mean, the reign of Messiah on 
earth— the visible church — then the text proves 
merely that a man cannot enter the church without 
baptism, and leaves the subject of the remission of 
sins, wholly untouched. So far as this passage 
teaches us, a man may be pardoned before, or after, 
as well as in the act of immersion. It has no rele- 
vancy to the subject under discussion. 

But what does the text under discussion mean ? 
It is not incumbent on me to show its meaning. I have 
proved that it does not refer to baptism, and that if 
it does, it fails to support the doctrine of baptismal 
remission — -this is sufficient for my purpose. I will, 
however, perform a work of supererogation. I will 
quote on this subject a passage from a sermon of 
the Kev. James Saurin, formerly pastor of the 
French church at the Hague, celebrated alike for 



268 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

his learning, eloquence and piety. ^^ The phrase;'^ 
says this incomparable writer, " to be born of water 
and of the Spirit, is a Hebraical phraseology, im^ 
porting to be born of spiritual water. By a similar 
expression, it is said in the 3d chapter of St. Mat- 
thew, ^ I indeed (says John the Baptist) baptize you 
with water unto repentance, but there cometh after 
me one mightier than I ; he shall baptize you with 
the Holy Ghost and with fire ;' that is, with spirit^ 
ual life'' — -(fire, I presume, is meant.) , , , '' The 
Jews call the change which they presume their 
proselytes had experienced, a spiritual birth ; a new 
hirtli ; a regeneration. It was one of their maxims 
that the moment a man became a proselyte, he was 
regarded as a child, once born in sin, but now born 
in lioliness. . , . Though it be not necessary to 
prove by numerous authorities the first remark we 
shall make on the words of Christ, ' To be born of 
spiritual water,' and to be ^ born again,' it is proper 
at least to proj)ose it ; otherwise it would be diffi- 
cult to account for our Saviour's reproving Nico- 
demus as being ^ a master in Israel, and not knowing 
these things.' For a doctor in the law does not 
seem reprehensible for not understanding a language 
peculiar to Jesus Christ, and till then unheard of ; 
whereas the blame naturally devolved on this Jew 
for exclaiming at expressions familiar to the Rabbins.'^ 
Saurin^s Sermons, translated from the French, by 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 269 

Kev. Robert Robinson, and others. Vol. 2^ pp. 
419, 420. 

'' Christ also loved the church, and gave himself 
for it ; that he might sanctify and cleanse it vnth 
the washing of water by the word." Eph. 5 : 25, 26. 
This text is adduced by Mr. Campbell with great 
confidence in support of his cherished theory, that 
sins are remitted in the very act of immersion. Let 
us patiently examine it. Several remarks made in 
the investigation of John 3 : 5, are equally appli- 
cable to the passage in hand. That the phrase, 

Kadaploag Tu 7iovTp(^ Tov vdarog, i[i\dii he might ^^ cleaUSO 

it by the washing of water/' which occurs nowhere 
else in the New Testament, means baptism, is simply 
an assumption^ and cannot be proved. The weight 
of authority is in favor of this interpretation, but a 
large measure of it, both Romanist and Protestant, 
presses the text into the service of baptismal regen- 
eration. But admitting, for the sake of argument, 
that the phrase means baptism, the passage cannot, 
with any fairness, be offered in support of baptismal 
remission. The reader must keep his eye on the 
question at issue. Are sins forgiven in baptism ? 
Christ gave himself for the church that he might 
sanctify and cleanse it loith the loashing of water— 
baptism by the word. Christ does two things for the 
church, sanctifies and cleanses it, with the washing 
of water. Now, the first of these terms, in the usus 
loquendi of the New Testament, never refers to a 



270 CiMPBELLlSM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

change of state^ or the remission of sins^ but in- 
variably to a moral change. The term aylaori^ from 
ayiu^u^ to separate^ consecrate, purify, '^ sanctify/' 
is never used hy any inspired writer to denote 
pardon or justification. It is, as has already been 
shown, distinguished from justification. 1 Cor. 6 : 
11. It means to make holy. '' The very God of 
peace sanctify you wholly.'' 1 Thess. 5 : 23. ■ ^ He 
that is holy, let him he holy still." Kev. 22 : 11. If 
there is a respectable author in the English tongue, 
except those who use the Bethany dialect, who gives 
it any other meaning, I have yet to learn who he 
is. The word Kadapiaag^ from Kadapi^G)^ to clcansc, 
render pure, to free from the influence of error and 
sin, is nearly as unfavorable to the argument of Mr. 
Campbell. It is used to denote the healing of the 
leper : ^^ Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me 
clean.'' Matt. 8 : 2. It is employed to signify the 
process of moral purification in the redeemed : 
'^ Let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the 
flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of 
God." 2 Cor. 7: 1. ^^Who gave himself for us, 
that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and 
purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of 
good works." Tit. 2 : 14. In one place, the word 
j)robablj refers to the removal of guilt from the con- 
science by the blood of Christ. Heb. 9 : 14. In 
every other passage, where it relates to the redemp- 
tion of men^ it denotes a moral renovation. That 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 271 

both sanctify and cleanse^ have, in the text under 
consideration, reference to a moral purification, 
seems to be beyond reasonable dispute. The Apostle 
tells us distinctly for what purpose Christ sanctifies 
and cleanses the church, with the washing of water, 
by the word. It is that he may present it to him- 
self ^^ a glorious churchy not having S23Qtj or vjrinhle^ 
or any such things but that it should be lioly^ and 
without hlemish!^ These are clearly moral effects-— 
effects in harmony with the universal meaning of 
the word sanctify^ and almost universal meaning 
of the word cleanse. Christ proposes to purify, 
adorn, and perfect his church ^^ with the washing 
of water by the word.'' If the phrase ^^ washing of 
water'' means baptism, then the text teaches, not the 
remission of sins in -the act of baptism, but rather 
baptismal regeneration and sanctification. At any 
rate it will be the business of those who contend for 
that meaning of the phrase, to free the passage from 
a consequence which is exceedingly plausible, if it 
is not legitimate. But are such moral effects as the 
Apostle so graphically describes attributable to bap- 
tism ? This moral cleansing is ascribed to faith — 
^^ Purifying their hearts by faith." Acts 15 : 9 ; to 
the word of God — ^^ Seeing ye have purified your 
souls in obeying the truth, through the Spirit ;" 1 
Peter 1 : 22, and to the hlood of Christ—'' The 
blood of Jesus Christ his Son, cleanseth us from all 
sin; " 1 Jno. 1 ; 7, but never , urjlessit be in the text 



272 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

under examination^ to bajptism. There is^ indeed, 
a ?uovTp6v^ or bath, which cleanses the soul, as the 
washing of water cleanses the body ; but this bath 
is not bajDtism. "In that day, there shall be a 
fountain opened to the house of David, and to the 
inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for unclean- 
ness/' Zee. 13 : 1. He has a poor conception of 
this sin-cleansing fountain, who supposes that it is 
baptism. Multitudes have been baptized who have 
not been cleansed from sin and uncleanness ; and as 
many have been cleansed who have not been bap- 
tized. This soul-cleansing fountain is beautifully 
described by England's evangelic bard : — 

" There is a fountain filled with blood, 

Drawn from ImmaQuel's veins ; 
And sinners, plunged beneath that flood. 

Lose all their guilty stains." 

The same wondrous fountain is portrayed, with 
different imagery, by one less gifted in song, but 
not less fervent in spirit, or learned in the Scrip- 
tures, than was the gentle Oowper. 

" Here at Bethesda's pool, the poor, 

The withered, halt, and blind, 
With waiting hearts expect a cure. 

And free admittance find. 

Here streams of wondrous virtue flow, 

To heal a sin-sick soul ; 
To wash the filthy white as snow, 

And make the wounded whole." 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 273 

Whether the blood of Christy or the Gospel 
which reveals the eflficacy of that blood, be con- 
sidered the fountain, is not material — for these 
things are inseparable — this is the true loutron — 
the soul-purifying bath. In this the church is sanc- 
tified and cleansed, and made ^^ a glorious church, 
not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing." 

I see but one method of attempting to evade the 
force of the above reasoning. It may be said that 
^^ Christ loved the church and gave himself for it," 
to deliver it from the guilt as well as the pollution 
of sin — to secure for it the remission of sins, as well 
•IS sanctification. This is readily granted. Some 
passages of Scripture, however, display the grace 
of God, and the efficacy of Christ's blood, in the 
remission of sins, without any allusion to sanctifica- 
tion. ^' Being justified freely by his grace through 
the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." Eom. 3 : 
24. In other passages the purifying efficacy of 
Christ's blood is exhibited without any reference to 
justification — '^ Jesus also that he might sanctify 
the people with his own blood, suffered without the 
gate." Heb. 13 : 12. The text we are discussing 
belongs to the latter class of Scriptures. Christ 
gave himself for the church that he might sanctify 
and cleanse it — and by so doing make it holy, 
faultless and glorious — worthy of himself Kemis- 
sion of sins is a blessing which believers derive from 
Christ — and this truth is plainly taught in many 



274 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

portions of the Bible ; but this Scripture has no 
reference to the remission of sins^ and consequently 
cannot prove that they are remitted in the moment 
of baptism. 

"According to his mercy Z^e saved us, hy the 
wasTiing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy 
Ghost. ^^ Titus 3:5. 

" The like figure whereunto even haptism doth 
also now save us (not the putting away of the filth 
of the fleshy but the answer of a good conscience 
toward God^) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.'' 
1 Peter 3 : 21. 

These two passages may be conveniently ex- 
amined together. 

The phrase " washing of regeneration'' is found 
no where in the Scriptures but in the text cited 
from the epistle to Titus. It is generally, not 
imiversally supposed to signify baptism. That it 
does cannot be proved. My own opinion is, that it 
is exegetical of the following words, " renewing of 
the Holy Ghost." Eegeneration is called a wash- 
ing, because it is a moral cleansing ; and this wash- 
ing is precisely equivalent to the " renewing of the 
Holy Ghost." The text may be rendered " the 
v/ashing of regeneration even {k-oi) the renewing of 
the Holy Ghost." The Greek participle Kai is fre- 
quently rendered even in the New Testament, 
Mat. 8 : 27 ; 25 : 29. Mark 6 : 12, &c. But, so fai 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 275 

as this argument is concerned, I will admit that the 
words '^ washing of regeneration'' mean baptism. 

The text above cited from Peter is one of the 
most obscure in the apostolic epistles. Commenta- 
tors have been greatly perplexed and divided con- 
cerning its import. As it is not necessary for my 
purpose, I shall not attempt to expound it. 

Do these Scriptures teach that the sins of a be- 
liever are remitted in the act of bai)tism ? This is 
the question under discussion. God saves us, '^by 
the washing of regeneration (baptism) and renewing 
of the Holy Ghost.'' '^ Baptism doth also now save 
us." 

The term salvation is of comprehensive import. 
It denotes the whole process by which we are de- 
livered from sin, and fitted for the enjoyment of 
heaven. It includes a thorough moral renovation, 
the remission of sins, adoption into the family of 
God, and perseverance unto death in the way of 
holiness. It is commenced in repentance, carried 
forward in sanctification, and will be completed by 
the resurrection from the dead. The sincere be- 
liever in Christ, even before baptism, is in a state 
of salvation, but his salvation is incomplete. Now, 
God saves us by all the means which he employs to 
instruct, impress, purify, and preserve us. The 
written word, the ministry of the word, meditation, 
prayer, baptism, the Lord's Supper, afflictions, are 
all means by which God saves us. We are said to 



276 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

be saved by faith — saved by hope — to save ourselves 
and others, 1 Tim. 4 : 10 — to work out our own sal- 
vation, Phil. 2 : 12. Salvation is promised to him 
that endureth to the end. Matt. 16 : 22. Christ is 
the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey 
him. Heb. 5 : 9. And we are saved by baptism. 
All these things have an influence in securing our 
salvation— are among the means by which God, in 
his mercy, carries on and completes the work. Bap- 
tism, which symbolizes the regenerating influence 
of the Spirit of God, and is a public and solemn 
acknowledgment of the remission of sins through 
faith in Christ, is designed and fitted to separate us 
from the world, impress on us our obligations to 
Christ, and aid us in the pathway to heaven. It 
certainly, however, does not follow from this posi- 
tion that the remission of sins is suspended on the 
act of baptism. This conclusion is drawn from the 
assumption, that whatever promotes our salvation 
is essential to the forgiveness of sins — an assumption 
manifestly false. '^ He that endureth to the end 
shall be saved'' — but is the believer unpardoned 
until he finishes his race ? or, is he not pardoned at 
the commencement of it ? Christians are exhorted 
to work out their own salvation — ^but are not their 
sins forgiven before the completion of the work ? 
We are saved by baptism — not as a condition of 
obtaining the remission of sins, but as one of the 
means which God employs to perfect the work of 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 277 

our salvation ; a means not indispensable to that 
result. 

The remaining propositions of the Extra^ I will 
very briefly dispose of. 

The Until sets forth that ^^ immersion and wash- 
ing of regeneration are two Bible names for the 
same act!' Chn'ty Eestored^ p. 223. Mr. Camp- 
beirs views on regeneration/ having a very loose 
connexion with the subject of the remission of sins^ 
I have pretty fully discussed in another place^ and 
will dismiss without farther remarks. 

Under the eleventh proposition^ Mr. Campbell 
furnishes a long list of authorises to prove that the 
early Christian Fathers considered immersion as the 
'^regeneration'' and '^ remission of sins j' spoken of 
in the New Testament. If this was the testimony 
of the Fathers, it differs very widely, on one point, 
from Mr. Campbell's system. ^^ All the Apostolic 
Fathers/' says the Extra, " allude to, and speak oi" 
Christian immersion as the '^ remission of sins." 
Now, according to the Bethany Eeformation, im- 
mersion is not the '^ remission of sins,'' but the 
means of obtaining it. Which is right, the Apos- 
tolic Fathers, or the father of the '^ current 
Eeformation ?" 

I deem these Fathers of very little importance in 
the controversy. That they early attached an 
undue importance to Christian ordinances is very 
clear. That they called baptism " regeneration," 



278 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

confounding the symbol with the thing symbolized, 
and ascribed to the act a sin-cleansing efficacy, ig 
quite as evident, and entitled to as much consider- 
ation, as that they employed in regard to the 
eucharist strong language which is confidently cited 
by the Papists in support of the dogma of transub- 
stantiation. If Mr. Campbell can prove the iden- 
tity of baptism and regeneration, if he can establish 
the doctrine of baptismal remission by the authority 
of the Fathers, the Eomanists can by testimonies 
equally clear, pointed, and unexceptionable, support 
the doctrine of the real presence in the mass. That 
the early converts to Christianity from heathenism 
should have had a strong tendency to attach an ex- 
cessive and superstitious importance to the cere- 
monials of religion, will surprise no one who carefully 
considers the character of their idolatrous training, 
and the natural bias of imperfectly educated minds. 
To this tendency, and the seemingly trivial mistakes 
that early sprang from it, we trace that stream of 
superstition, error and impiety, which has so long 
overflowed and desolated the larger portion of the 
so-called Christian world. We should be careful 
how we follow a leader, who, to overwhelm the op- 
posers of a favorite theory, would open afresh this 
copious fountain of pollution and mischief, 

Mr. Campbeirs tioelfth and last proposition in 
support of baptismal remission, maintains that 
'^ the reformed creeds, Episcop)alian^ Preshyteriarij 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 279 

Methodist and Baptist j substantially avoiv the same 
views of immersion^ (as those developed in the 
Extra j) though apparently afraid to carry them out 
in practice'' Chn'ty Kestored^ p. 231. 

I will leave the other denominations to vindicate 
their own creeds, if they deem it proper to do so. 
Some of them employ language on the subject of 
baptism which I do not approve, any more than I 
do that of Mr. Campbell on the same subject. But 
on behalf of the Baptists, I affirm that they have 
never taught, and never held any views substantially 
agreeing, or that could by any ingenuity be tortured 
into an agreement with, Mr. Campbell's notions on 
the identity of immersion and regeneration, and on 
the remission of sins in the very instant of being 
put under water. The assertion is a gross misrepre- 
sentation of the Baptist denomination and of every 
member of it ; and Mr. Campbell himself furnishes 
the proof of this misrepresentation. He quotes the 
Baptist creed as follows — 

^' Chap. XXX. Section 1. Baptism is an ordi- 
nance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus 
Christ, to be unto the party baptized a sign of his 
fellowship with him in his death and resurrection ; 
and of his being engrafted into him ; of remission 
of sins, and of his giving up himself unto Grod, 
through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness 
of life.'' Chn'ty Eestored, p. 234. 

The Baptists have always maintained that bap- 



280 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

tism is a sign of the remission of sins ; nor have 
they been ashamed^ as Mr. Campbell insinuates, to 
carry out this view, so far as it could be, in practice. 
But is it possible that Mr. Campbell can think that 
the teaching of the Baptist creed is ^^ substantially" 
the same as his theory of baptismal remission ? If 
so, he is the most unfortunate writer that has ever 
put pen to paper. We might as well endeavor to 
understand the ravings of a bedlamite as the stereo- 
typed writings of the Bethany Keformer. But let 
us read his remarks on the creed — 

'^ The Baptist follows the Presbyterian church as 
servilely as the Methodist church follows the English 
hierarchy.'' We are willing to follow the Presby- 
terians, so far as they follow the Bible ; and if this 
be ser\dlity, it were a pity but that the Keformer 
had possessed a good measure of it. It might have 
saved him from many profitless speculations, un- 
seemly contradictions, and pernicious errors, and 
the world from a '^ Keformation,'' which, to speak 
charitably, has been of very questionable benefit. 
But let us hear more of the commentary. '^ But 
she (the Baptist church) avows her faith that im- 
mersion is a sign of remission.'' And then, as if to 
obscure the subject, he continues — ^^ A sign of the 
past, the present, or the future ! A sign accom- 
panying !" 5s"ow, he knew perfectly that the Bap- 
tists, without a dissentient, understood baptism to 
be a sign, as the terms of their creed plainly import, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 281 

of the remission of sins already received and enjoyed 
by faith in Christ ; but whether it be ^^a sign of 
the past^ the present^ or the future/*' it differs as 
widely from Mr. Campbeirs notions of the identity 
of immersion and regeneration, and of remission 
through the act of immersion, as the Lord's Sup- 
per of the New Testament differs from the Papal 
Mass. 

WEEKLY COMMUNION. 

One article of the Bethany Eeformation is, that 
all the churches of Christ are required to coraraune 
at the Lord's table every Lord's-day, Mr. Camp- 
bell's views on this subject are expressed in the fol- 
lowing condensed proposition, in his Millennial Har- 
binger Extra, No. II, p. 69. 

''The hi^eahing of the one loaf^ andthe joint par-- 
ticipation of the Lord^ in commemoration of the 
Lord's death, usually called the ' Lord's Supper , 
is an instituted part of the luorship and edification 
of all Christian congregations in all their stated 
meetings^ 

The practice of weekly communion was not pecu- 
liar to the Eeformers. It prevailed among several 
Christian sects in Scotland, where Mr. Campbell 
received his collegiate education, and early religious 
impressions. It was not seriously opposed among 
the Baptists, except as it was a part of a system, 
containing many objectionable principles, and usu- 



282 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

ally advocated as the harbinger of other reforms^ or 
changes, of far more questionable propriety. 

It is not my purpose to follow the circuitous and 
prolix train of propositions and arguments by which 
the extra aims to establish the divine autliority of 
weekly communion. What I have to say on the 
subject may be comprehended in a few plain posi- 
tions, in the brief discussion of which the most iuii- 
portant of these arguments will be noticed. 

1. WeeMy communion is not commanded in the 
Scriptures^ either hy Christ or his apostles. This 
point is conceded. Every commemorative institu- 
tion, except the Lord's Supper, ordained by divine 
authority, had a fixed time for its observance. Mr, 
Campbell infers from analogy that the Lord's Sup- 
per — a commemorative institution — must have a 
stated time for its observance, and that time is every 
Lord's-day. Extra, No. II, p. 73, This reasoning 
is not legitimate. In every commemorative rite, 
except the Lord's Supper, divinely ordained, the 
time of 'its observance is a part of the law of the in- 
stitution. The law of the Passover prescribes defi- 
nitely the time^ as well as the manner of keeping it. 
But the Saviour in the law of the Lord's Supper 
does not prescribe the times of its observance, but 
uses most indefinite language on the subject. 
^^ This do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance 
of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink 
this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come." 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 283 

1 Cor. 11 : 25-26. Why was the Lord's Supper 
made an exception to this rule ? Does not a differ- 
ence in the form of the law establishing this rite, 
imply a difference in the rite itself ? 

The Lord's Supper is not, however, wholly anom- 
alous. Fasting and prayer, the former, at least, a 
positive institution, are Christian duties, the times 
of whose observance are not divinely prescribed, but 
left to be decided by the circumstances and desires of 
the worshippers. Why may not the Lord's Supper 
belong to the same class of religious duties ? 

2. It does not clearly appear from the Scriptures 
that weeMy communion ivas practised hy any of the 
apostolic churches. 

Three passages of Scripture are chiefly relied on 
by the advocates of the practice for its support. 

The first text is Acts 2 : 42. ^' And they con- 
tinued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine, and fel^ 
lowship, and in hreahing of hread^ (partaking of the 
Lord's Supper,) and in prayers." From this lan- 
guage Mr. Campbell infers that the first Christian 
congregation, which met in Jerusalem, ^^ did as 
statedly attend upon the breaking of the loaf in their 
public meetings, as they did upon any other part of 
the Christian worship." Mill. Har. Extra, No. II, 
]>. 69. All that can be logically deduced from this 
text is, that ^' breaking of bread" was a part of the 
instituted worship, steadily observed, by the first 
Christian church ; but whether it was observed 



284 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

daily, weekly, or monthly, before or after prayer, or 
more or less frequently than prayer, does not ap- 
pear. It may be affirmed of a church that com- 
munes monthly, as truly as of one that communes 
weekly, or daily, that it continues steadfastly '^ in 
breaking of bread.'^ 

The second passage relied on in support of the 
practice is Acts 20 : 7. ^^ And upon the first day 
of the week when the disciples came together to 
hreak hreadj' &c. From this passage it is inferred 
that it was the custom of the disciples to meet on 
the first day of the week, and that the primary 
object of their meeting was to break bread. The 
premises do not justify the conclusion. It is not 
logical to derive a general conclusion from a joartic- 
ular fact. The fact stated in the text is particular. 
When Paul, the founder of the church, was in 
Troas, the disciples came together to break bread. 
Suppose it had been a special appointment for com- 
munion, in view of the presence of the distinguished 
apostle, or the stated monthly communion of the 
church, might not the historian have said, nay, 
would he not have been compelled to say, in record- 
ing the event, '^ On the first day of the week when 
the disciples came together to hreak bread V On 
that particular day the disciples in Troas came to- 
gether to break bread, but whether they invariably 
came together on the first day of the week for the 
same purpose cannot be learned from the text, or 



CAMPBELLiSM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 285 

its context. All that can be fairly affirmed is that 
the text is in harmony with weekly communion, and 
contributes, with other testimonies, to show the 
probability of its prevalence in the apostolic 
churches. See Mill. Har. Extra, No. 2, p. 70. 

Another 1>ext quoted in proof of weekly commu- 
nion is 1 Cor. 11 : 20. ^^ When ye come together 
therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord^s 
Supper.*' ^^ To act thus,'' says Mr. Campbell, "is 
unworthy of the object of your meeting. To act 
thus is not to eat the Lord's Supper. It is not to 
show forth the Lord's death. Thereby declaring 
that this is the chief object of meeting." Mill. 
Har. Extra, No. 2, p. 72. As the Corinthians met 
weekly, and as eating the Lord's Supper was the 
chief object of their meeting, it is inferred that 
they communed weekly. From this reasoning I 
dissent. The Corinthian church sadly profaned the 
Lord's supper. They changed it into a bacchana- 
lian feast, perverting it from its true design. The 
apostle reproved them for their impiety. " When 
ye come together therefore into one place," for re- 
ceiving the communion, whether daily, weekly or 
monthly, "this is not to eat the Lord's Supper," 
but to desecrate it. Whether they came together 
for other purposes than to eat the Lord's Supper it 
was not the design of Paul to consider. Of their 
communion seasons, and only of their communion 
seasons, does he discourse ; and when they as- 



286 CAMPBELLiSM IN ITS PKINClPLEg; 

sembled to ^^ break bread'' they profaned the insti- 
tution. Of this text I must say, as of the preced- 
ing, it accords with the practice of weekly commu- 
nion, but can only be logically urged in support of 
the prohahility of its observance in the primitive 
churches. 

3. Some of the arguments used in sitpport of 
weekly^ may with equal propriety he used in support 
of daily communion, ^^ Spiritual health as well as 
corporeal health, is dependent on food. It is 
requisite for corporeal health that food not only be 
salutary in its nature, and sufficient in its quantity, 
but that it be received at proper intervals, and 
these regular and fixed. Is it otherwise with moral 
health ?'' So reasons the Mill. Har. Extra, No. 2, 
p. 73. The writer might, quite as logically, have 
carried his analogy a little farther. As daily food 
is requisite for the health of the body, so daily 
communion is requisite for the health of the soul. 
Doctor Doddridge says — ^^ We have great reason to 
believe that the eucharist was often celebrated 
among these primitive converts, perhaps much 
oftener than every Lord's day." Note on Acts 2 : 
42. It would seem then that the probable practice 
of the first Christian church concurs with the logic 
of the Extra to lead the churches back, not to 
weekly^ but to daily, or semi- weekly communion. 

4. Admitting that weekly communion was observed 
hy the apostolic churches^ does itfollow that theprac- 



CAMt^BELLlSM IN ITS PBINCIPLES. 287 

tice is obligatory on all churches ? The soundness 
of this conclusion does not appear. If the law in- 
stituting the Lord's Supper, has left the times of 
its observance to be decided by the discretion of the 
churches, then the practice of the early churches, 
in the exercise of this discretion, is not obligatory 
on other churches. Let me illustrate this point by 
a similar case. The duty of Christians to contribute 
of their worldly substance for the support and 
spread of the Gospel is plainly revealed in the Scrip- 
tures ; but the measure and manner of the contri- 
bution are to be determined by them in view of their 
resources, circumstances, and the exigency of the 
Redeemer's cause. Now, the first Christian church 
in Jerusalem /^ sold their possessions and their 
goods,'' ^^ and had all things common." The law 
of Christ required that they should contribute, and 
they in their discretion and liberality contributed 
all they possessed. But is their example obligatory 
on churches in the present day ? The advocates 
of weekly communion will scarcely maintain the 
affirmative. But if the example of the first churchy 
under one indefinite law, is not obligatory on other 
churches, why should its example under another 
law, equally indefinite^ be obligatory ? 

5. Conceding, as Mr. Campbell maintains, that 
the Lord's Supper '^ is an instituted part of the wor- 
ship and edification of all Christian congregations 
in all their stated meetings/^ it is grievously neg^ 



288 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PllINCIl^LES. 

lected not only hy the religious sects generally^ hut 
hy the churches of the current Reformation. These 
churclies meet^ particularly those in cities^ twice 
every Lord's day, once on some week-day evening^ 
and sometimes for many days and nights consecu- 
tively, and yet they break bread only once a week. 
If the Lord's Supper is an instituted part of the 
worship of all Christian churches in all their stated 
meetings^ by what authority, in heaven or on earth, 
do the Reformed churches assemble, statedly and re- 
peatedly, without breaking the loaf? If their 
principles are correct, they need another and an 
important reformation. 

6. There is no objection to weekly communion^ 
provided it is not imposed on the churches as a term 
of communion. The practise is not binding on the 
churches. But it is admitted that among the 
early churches, it is highly probable, that it did 
generally, if it did not universally prevail. I do not 
perceive any solid objection against returning to the 
practice. It may be well for the churches seriously 
and candidly to inquire, whether a more frequent 
celebration of the Lord's Supper— a rite so preg- 
nant with instruction, and so eminently impressive — 
would not contribute to increase their piety and 
usefulness. 

I cannot, perhaps, more appropriately, than at 
this point, introduce a few remarks on Mr. Camp- 
beirs views of what is usually termed '" Close Com^ 



GAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 289 

munioifij' No man was ever more clearly shut up 
by his principles to the necessity of insisting on re- 
stricted communion^ than Mr. Campbell. Main- 
taining, as he does, that without immersion, there 
is neither regeneration, conversion, nor the remis- 
sion of sins, he cannot, without gross inconsistency^ 
receive the unbaptized to the Lord's table. Surely, 
those who are not '' pardoned, justified, sanctified, 
reconciled, adopted and saved,'' as according to Mr. 
Campbeirs theory, all unimmersed persons are not, 
are without Scriptural qualifications for communing 
at the Lord's table. The legitimate consequence 
of his principles he has very fully admitted. 

In the year 1835, Mr. Campbell had a corres- 
pondence with William Jones, a distinguished 
Baptist minister of London. Mr. Jones proposed 
the following question. '' Do any of your churches 
admit unbaptized persons to communion ; a prac- 
tice that is becoming very prevalent in this country .^" 

To this query Mr. Campbell replied — ^^ JSTot one, 
as far as known to me. I am at a loss to understand 
on what principles — by what law, precedent, or 
license, any congregation founded upon the Apostles 
and Prophets, Jesus Christ being the chief corner- 
stone, could dispense with the practice of the Prim- 
itive church — with the commandment of the Lord, 
and the authority of his Apostles. Does not this 
look like making void the word or commandment of 
God, by human tradition ? I know not how T could 



290 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 

exhort one professor to ^ arise and be baptized/ as 
Ananias commanded Saul^ and at the same time 
receive another into the congregation without it. 
Nay, why not dispense with it altogether, and be 
consistent ?'' Mill. Har., vol. 6, p. 18. 

In 1843, in his debate with Rev. N. L. Rice, Mr. 
Campbell, to prove the liberality of the Reformers, 
spoke thus — ^' We, indeed, receive to our commu- 
nion persons of other denominations, who will take 
upon them the responsibility of their participating 
with us. We do, indeed, in our affections, and in 
our practice, receive all Christians, all who give evi- 
dence of their faith in the Messiah, and of their 
attachment to his person, character, and will.^' 
Deb. with Rice, p. 785. 

Mr. Campbell, in his debate with Rice, labored 
to show the perfect agreement of the above extracts ; 
but labored unsuccessfully. If the passages are not 
contradictory, it will be hard to find a contradiction 
in the English language. To Mr. Jones he says, 
We admit no wibapttzed person to communion — 
there is neither '^ law, precedent, nor license'' for it. 
To Mr. Rice, he says, ^^ We receive to our commu- 
nion persons of other denominations,'' unbaptized 
persons, ^^ who will take upon them the responsi- 
bility of participating with us.'' 

Every man has a right to change his opinions ; 
and for an honest and frank avowal of the change 
he deserves no censure. Every man has a perfect 



CAMPBELLISM \N ITS PRINCIPLES. 291 

right to explain the terms in which he expresses his 
opinions. But when^ from inadvertence^ obscurity 
of thought; or incorrectness of diction, he perpe- 
trates a plain and palpable contradiction, he owes 
it to himself, to fairness, and to truth to acknow- 
ledge and correct the error. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

One of the avowed objects^ as lias already been 
stated, of Mr. Campbeirs Eeformation was the 
union of all Christians on the apostolic foundation. 
Of the desirableness of the object there is no differ- 
ence of opinion among the intelligent friends of the 
Kedeemer. It is an end devoutly wished and 
prayed for by all who love Jesus Christ in sincerity. 
The union so worthy to be sought by Christians, is 
not, however, a mere ecclesiastical union, cemented 
by worldly policy, and maintained by the ignorance, 
apathy and subservience of the laity, and the 
ghostly intolerance of the clergy ; nor a mere nom- 
inal unity, in which men of all principles and all 
practices are held together by the utterance of a 
common " Shibboleth ;'' but a unity in faith and 
knowledge, cemented by love, and resulting in har- 
monious, cordial and effective exertions for the pro- 
motion of the Eedeemer's kingdom. 

What is the proper foundation of Christian 
Union ? This is a very important question — a 
question which is clearly answered in the Scriptures. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 293 

This foundation is ^' the truth'' — that system of 
divine truth styled in the New Testament ^^ the 
Gospel/' '^the faith/' ^'the doctrine of Christ/^ 
&c. This truth^ not merely as it is recorded in the 
Scriptures^ but as it is understood, believed, loved 
and obeyed, becomes a bond of union among Chris- 
tians. When Christ ascended up on high, ^^he 
gave some, apostles ; and some, prophets ; and 
some, evangelists ; and some, pastors and teachers ; 
for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the 
ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ : 
Till ive all come to the unity of the faith^ and of the 
hnoidedge of the Son of God^ unto a perfect man,'^ 
&c. Eph. 4 : 8-14. The ascended Kedeemer be- 
stowed on his saints supernaturally qualified in- 
structors, to secure their unity in ^^ the faith," the 
^'onefaith'^ mentioned v. 5 — the system of evan- 
gelical truth — and " the knowledge of the Son of 
God," — of his person, character, work and offices — 
whom to know is life eternal. And one end which 
Christ proposed to secure by this enlightened union 
of the saints is their steadfast adherence to the 
truth. ^' That we henceforth be no more children, 
tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind 
of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning 
craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive /' 
&c., verses 14-15. Christians are exhorted in the 
Scriptures to '^ continue in the faith grounded and 
settled," Col. 1 : 23 ; to strive " together for the 



294 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

faith of the Gospel/' Phil. 1 : 27 ; and '' earnestly 
to contend for the faith once delivered to the saints.^' 
Jude 3. They are said to have ^^ fellowship in the 
Gospel/' Phil. 1 : 5. Christians love one another 
in the truth. ^'The elder unto the elect lady and 
her children^ whom I love in the truth ; and not I 
only^ but also all they that have know^n the truth ; 
for the truth's sake^ which dwelleth in us^ and shall 
be with us forever '' 2 John, verses 1-2. If Chris- 
tians ^' walk in the light/' that is, in the knowledge 
of the truth, they " have fellowship one with an- 
other." 1 John 1 : 7. They are required to reject 
from their fellowship all who do not bring the " doc- 
trine of Christ.'^ '' He that abideth in the doc- 
trine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the 
Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not 
this doctrine, receive Mm not into your house, 
neither bid him God speed.'' 2 John, v. 10. The 
church in Pergamos were sharply reproved because 
they retained in their fellov/ship some who held the 
^' doctrine of Balaam," and also some who held 
^^ the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes," which Christ 
hated. Eev. 2 : 14-15. From these Scriptures it 
is manifest that divine truth, or the Gospel, as it is 
believed, understood and loved, is the basis of Chris- 
tian union. The saints love one another in the 
truth, and for the truth — in obeying the truth they 
have fellowship one with another — they are required 
to hold fast the truth, to contend earnestly for it^ 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPUNE. 295 

and to reject from their communion those who do 
not embrace it. Any union which is not founded 
on the knowledge and love of Divine truth is a 
union of ignorance^ interest^ policy or coercion ; but 
not the union for which Christ prayed, and for 
which his people should labor. 

It is by no means easy to define the measure of 
ignorance and unbelief compatible with the exist- 
ence of genuine piety, and sincere Christian fellow- 
ship. There are, however, certain facts, doctrines 
and duties, fundamental to the Christian system ; 
and the willful rejection of these, or any one of them, 
from whatever obliquity of intellect or of heart, pre- 
cludes the possibility of enlightened. Scriptural, 
Christian union. The Gospel assumes the exist- 
ence, and moral government of God— the depravity 
and guilt of man— and to deny either of these truths 
is to subvert the foundation of Christianity. The 
Gospel reveals the Divinity of Christ, the expiatory 
nature of his sufferings and death, his resurrection 
from the dead, and his investiture with regal author- 
ity at the right hand of the Father ; and he that 
rejects either of these truths, rejects the Gospel 
itself. Eepentance, faith, and a holy life, are 
plainly inculcated on men in the Gospel ; and he 
that denies their necessity, perverts and destroys the 
system. The Gospel teaches a future state of re- 
wards and punishments, from which it derives its 
strongest motives to piet}^ ; and he that denies or 



296 CAMPBELLISM IN IT^ DISCIPLINE. 

perverts this doctrine makes war upon^ if he does 
not overthrow ^^ the faith/^ It is not my purpose 
to furnish a summary of Christian doctrine, but only 
to point out some of the principles which are essen- 
tial to the system, and the knowledge and admission 
of which are indispensable to the Scriptural union 
of Christians. I do not affirm that a perfect knowl- 
edge of all these principles is essential to Christian 
fellowship ; but I do most earnestly maintain that 
the persistent rejection of any one of them, under 
whatever plausible pretence, and with whatever 
show of argument, precludes the possibility of ^^fel- 
lowship in the Gospel.'' Fellowship, indeed, there 
may be, but it is the fellowship of error, pseudo 
charity, and worldly policy — a fellowship founded 
on a principle, which bids " God-speed'' to him 
that brings not ^' the doctrine of Christ," and which 
retains in communion ^^ them which hold the doc- 
trine of the Nicolaitanes," that Christ hates. 

On the subject of Christian Union, Mr. Campbell 
has written many things which deserve considera- 
tion. It is my purpose, however, to restrict my 
remarks at present, to the foundation on which he 
j)roposes to establish this union. It is laid down 
in his Christianity Restored^ pp. 118, 119. 

" But the grandeur, sublimity, and beauty of the 
foundation of hope, and of ecclesiastical or social 
union, established by the author and founder of 
Christianity, consisted in this, that the belief of 



CAMPBELL] SM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 297 

ONE FACT^ and that upon the best evidence in the 
world, is all that is requisite, as far as faith goes, 
to salvation. The belief of this one fact, and 
submission to one institution, expressive of it, is 
all that is required of heaven to admission into the 
church. A Christian, as defined, not by Dr. Jolin- 
son, nor any creed-maker, but by one taught from 
heaven, is one that believes this one fact, and has 
submitted to one institution, and whose deportment 
accords with the morality and virtue of the great 
Prophet. The one fact is expressed in a single pro- 
position, that Jesus, the Nazarene, is the Messiah. 
The evidence upon which it is to be believed, is 
the testimony of twelve men, confirmed by prophecy, 
miracles, and spiritual gifts. The one institution is 
baptism into the name of the Father, and of the 
Son, and of the Holy Spirit.'' 

The reader has now a full view of the platform, 
established, not by ^^the author and founder of 
Christianity,'' but by Mr. Alexander Campbell of 
Bethany, Virginia, for the joyful union of all the 
sects and parties in Christendom. Before we ven- 
ture upon it, however, we must subject it to a care- 
ful examination. 

^^ The belief of one fact ^^ and ^^ submission to one 
institution^ constitute ^^the foundation of hope, 
and of ecclesiastical, or social union." So teaches 
Mr.jCJampbell. 

^^ With us," these are his words, ^^ Eevelation has 



298 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE!. 

nothing to do with opinions^ or abstract reasonings ; for 
it is founded wholly and entirely upon facts!' Chn^ty 
Restored^ p. 106 ^^ All revealed religion is based upon 
facts." p. 113. I should suppose that Mr. Campbell 
uses the term '^ fact'' in its secondary sense^ as equivar 
lent to " truth/' if his own definition did not preclude 
that supposition. " Fact/' he says^, '^ means something 
done. That God exists is a truth^ but not a fact ; 
that he created the heavens and the earth is a fact 
and a truth.'' pp. 106^ 107. I approve the defi- 
nition. That facts occupy an important place in 
the evangelic economy must be conceded ; but that 
the truths connected with them^ and from which 
they derive their significance^ are less important, 
must be denied. That God exists is a truth which 
lies at the foundation of all genuine religion^ natural 
and revealed. ^^For he that cometh to God must 
believe that he is^ and that he is a rewarder of them 
that diligently seek him." Heb. 11:6. That Jesus 
is the Son of God is a truth — that he wrought mir- 
acles is a fact ; that he was put to death by Pon- 
tius Pilate^ is a fact — that he died for our sins is a 
truth ; that he rose from the dead^ is a fact — 
that he rose ^^for our justification/' is a truth; 
that he ascended up to heaven^ is a fact — that 
he ever lives ^^ to make intercession for us/' is 
a truth ; and it will scarcely be maintained that 
these facts are more important than the truths con- 
nected with them. Indeed, the Gospel facts, won- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 299 

derful as they are, possess no value apart from the 
doctrine or truth, in which they had their origin, 
and by which their nature and uses are explained. 
The death of Jesus would be of no greater conse- 
quence to the world, than that of the two thieves 
who w^ere crucified with him, were it not that the 
event is a part of a great system of truths, facts and 
duties, extending backwards to the creation of the 
world, and forwards through the ages of eternity. 
From the proposition, then, that " all revealed reli- 
gion is based on facts j' I must beg leave to dissent. 
But Mr. Campbell goes farther still. He narrows 
greatly the ground which he at first occupied. He 
sets aside all facts, as fundamental in religion, ex- 
cept one, '^ The belief of one fact— is all that is re- 
quisite^ so far as faith goes, to salvation^ '^ This 
one fact,'' we are told, " is expressed in a single 
proposition — that Jesus the Nazarene is the Messiah, 
Now, according to Mr. Campbeirs own definition, 
this proposition is clearly not a fact^ but a truth. 
It is expressive not of something done^ but of some- 
thing that exists. In a note, Mr. Campbell writes 
— " The fundamental proposition is — that Jesus is 
the Christ, The fact, however, contained in this 
proposition is — that God has anointed Jesus of 
Nazareth as the only Saviour of sinners.'' p. 118. 
Now, I deny that the fact, as he terms it, is con- 
tained in the proposition. To affirm, as Mr. Camp- 
bell does, that the simple proposition, '' that Jesus 



300 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

is the Christ,^' contains the /ac^^ ^^tliat God anointed 
Jesus of Nazareth^ tlie only Saviour of sinners^'' is 
to evince a strange obscurity of perception, or to 
presume very far on the credulity of his readers. 
And even if it were admitted, contrary to Mr. Camp- 
bell's own definition, that the proposition is expres- 
sive of fact rather than triitli^ why does he affirm 
that it expresses one fact, when it manifestly ex- 
presses two ? That Jesus is the Nazarene, is one 
fact ; and that this Nazarene is the Christ, is another, 
and totally different fact. ^' The evidence,'' Mr. 
Campbell continues, '^ upon which it (the ^ fact/ 
or, more properly the truth) is to be believed is the 
testimony of twelve men, confirmed by prophecy, 
miracles, and spiritual gifts." But why does he 
say on the testimony of twelve men ? The apostles 
were divinely appointed, and important, but not 
the only oral witnesses of this truth. But we must 
believe it, if we believe it at all, not on oral but 
written testimony ; and in the New Testament we 
have but eight witnesses, three of whom did not be- 
long to the "twelve men,' the apostles. Thus 
loosely did this Reformer write on subjects funda- 
mental in his system, and demanding the greatest 
clearness of thought, and accuracy of expression. 

"Jesus the Nazarene is the Messiah,'' This is 
an important proposition. But by what authority 
does Mr. Campbell make the belief of it " the foun- 
dation'' of " ecclesiastical or social union ?'' There 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 301 

are other propositions contained in the Scriptures, 
expressing both facts and truths, equally funda- 
mental in the evangelic system, and the belief of 
which is equally necessary to salvation. That 
'^ Christ died for our sms/' along with other im- 
portant facts, is declared by Paul to be the Gospel 
which he preached to the Corinthians, and by which 
they were to be saved, if they would keep it " in 
memory.'' 1 Cor. 15 : 1-3. It is through faith in 
the blood of Christ , that God declares '' his right- 
eousness for the remission of sins that are past/' 
Eom. 3 : 25. That Jesus rose from the dead is a 
fact of primary importance in the Christian system, 
and the belief of it is requisite to salvation. ^^ If 
thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, 
and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath 
raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. '^ 
Eom. 10: 9. The ^^ one fact,'' which is not a fact, 
seems to have been arbitrarily selected, by the Ee- 
former, from many facts and truths equally impor- 
tant, and made the basis of '^ ecclesiastical union." 

But, w^e must examine this foundation still more 
carefully. Does Mr. Campbell, by the proposition 
that ''Jesus the Nazarene is the Messiah/' design 
to include those truths and facts, which are essen- 
tially connected with it, and which constitute the 
Gospel ? I grant that a sincere and an intelligent 
belief that Jesus is the Messiah, supposes a belief 
in the whole svstem of which this truth is an im- 



302 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

portant part. Salvation is promised to faith in the 
hlood of Christ — in the resurrection of Christ — and 
in the Gospel of Christy as well as to the belief of 
the ^^ one fact'' that ^' Jesus is the Messiah f and 
this variety of language is accounted for by the sim- 
ple^ and well understood principle that the belief 
of one fact or truth is used to denote a belief in the 
system of which it is an essential part. ISTow^ if by 
the belief of one fact, Mr. Campbell means the be- 
lief of all the truths and facts inseparably connected 
with it — in fine, the Gospel of Christ, I have, on 
this point, no controversy with him. But, then, it 
follows that Mr. Campbell has made no discovery 
on this subject — has proposed no new basis of eccle- 
siastical union. It is precisely that for which evan- 
gelical Christians have always contended. They 
maintain that the Grospel — the system of truth per- 
taining to human salvation — is the proper founda- 
tion for Christian union ; and in this judgment Mr. 
Campbell concurs. Whether, in this aspect of the 
case, he can be vindicated from having made a great 
ado about nothing, and having Avritten very vaguely 
and obscurely on a subject which called for clearness 
and precision, others may decide. 

It can hardly be supposed, however, that the 
above is the j)ropcr interpretation of the language 
under discussion. It does not fairly admit of this 
construction. '"'• The belief of one fact — is all 
THAT IS REQUISITE, as far as faith goes, to salvation. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 303 

If a man believes the proposition^ styled in the 
Bethany terminology '^one fact/^ 'Hhat Jesus tJie 
Nazarene is the Messiah^' it is not requisite to his 
salvation that he should believe anything else, 
whether fact or truth, in the universe. This is his 
simple, sole, all-comprehending creed, '^ I believe 
that Jesus the Nazarene is the Messiah'' In all the 
creeds, of all the sects, and in all the revelations of 
God, there is not a fact, truth or principle necessary 
to be believed in order to salvation, except this 
" one fact,'' which is to be believed on the '' testi- 
mony of twelve men," 

On this subject I join issue with Mr. Campbell. 
I cannot admit that the belief of one fact is all that 
is requisite^ as far as faith goes^ to salvation. 

But let us hear the arguments in support of the 
position under discussion. '^ It is again and again 
asserted,'' says the writer, " in the clearest lan- 
guage, by the Lord himself, the apostles, Peter, 
Paul and John, that he that believes the testimony 
that Jesus is the Christ, is begotten of God," &c., 
p. 119. By this process of reasoning it can be 
proved with equal clearness, that the proposition 
that Jesus is the Son of God^ or that Jesus was 
raised from the d^ad^ is the ^^ one fact," or truth, 
the belief of which ^^ is all that is requisite, as far 
as faith goes, to salvation ;" for to the belief of 
these propositions salvation is promised. The true 
principle of interpreting these passages has been 



304 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

already explained. But where, permit me to ask, 
is it stated, or intimated, or implied, in the Scrip- 
tures, that the ^^ belief of one fact,'' ^^is all that 
is requisite, as far as faith goes ?'' To affirm that 
^^ whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is 
born of God,'' on the well understood principle, 
that he who believes that truth, also believes the 
facts and truths essentially connected with it, is 
widely different from affirming that the belief of 
one fact is all the faith requisite to salvation. But 
hear the Eeformer again. ^^ The Saviour expressly 
declared to Peter, that upon this fact, that he was 
the Messiah, the Son of God, he would huild his 
church^ p. 119. Now, I must affirm that the 
Saviour expressly declared no such thing. Neither 
the word ^^fact," nor any term of corresponding 
import appears in the passage referred to. Mat. 
16 : 18. The text is one, as to the proper inter- 
pretation of which, the most learned, pious, and 
distinguished Biblical critics have been greatly 
divided ; and to assume its meaning, and to employ 
that assumed meaning in support of a doubtful 
proposition, proves nothing so much as the paucity 
of the writer's arguments. But let us listen again. 
^^ And Paul has expressly declared that ' other 
foundation can no man lay (for ecclesiastical union) 
than that Jesus is the Christ.' " I do not re- 
member ever to have met with a more glaring per- 
version of the Word of God than this. Paul has 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 305 

expressly declared no such proposition. The pas- 
sage has quotation marks^ and yet no such passage 
is found in all the writings of Paul. The garbled 
text is recorded, 1 Cor. 3 : 11. It reads thus — 
'^ Other foundation can no man lay than that is 
laid, which is Jesus Christ/' The foundation, ex- 
pressly declared by the apostle to be laid, is, not 
the ^^ one fact,'' as the passage misquoted by Mr. 
Campbell would seem to import, that Jesus is the 
Christy but Jesus Christ, himself. This apostolic 
declaration is in perfect harmony with other por- 
tions of Scripture. See Isaiah 28 : 16. Eph. 2 : 
20. And, moreover, for Mr. Campbell's construc- 
tion of the passage there is no authority in the com- 
mon version, the New Translation, pubhshed by 
himself, nor the Greek text. On what ground he 
has made this most unwarrantable change in the 
text, I know not. He surely ought not to expect 
that it will be admitted on his mere declaration, in 
opposition to the plain import of the original, and 
its well established translation. 

In consideration of the flimsy arguments which 
have been noticed, the writer proceeds to remark — 
'' The point is proved that we have assumed ; and 
this proved, every thing is established requisite to 
the union of all Christians upon a proper basis.'' 
pp. 119-120. It is a striking peculiarity of Mr. 
Campbell's controversial writings that they abound 
in arguments to prove what nobody denies, and take 



306 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

for granted^ or furnish very sliglit evidence of the 
main points at issue. Of the twenty-eight pages 
devoted to the discussion of the Foundation of 
Christian Union^ not more than a page is occupied 
by the proofs, such as they are. that '^ the belief of 
one factj is all that is requisite, so far as faith goes, 
to salvation/' Whether these proofs are suflScient 
to establish the point, the intelligent reader must 
judge. 

But I am not yet done with this foundation. It 
is quite too broad and comprehensive. It sustains, 
on its ample surface, not only all Christians, as 
defined '^ by one taught from heaven/' but errorists 
of almost every class and grade. Arians, Socinians, 
Universalists, Materialists, Shakers, Mormons, to- 
gether with many who are ignorant and supersti- 
tious, profess as firmly and consistently, as Mr. 
Campbell, himself to believe that Jesus the Nazarene 
is the Messiah, They put their own interpretation 
on the language, and conform their religious creed 
to that interpretation. If they submit to the ^^ one 
institution,'' and their '^ deportment accords with 
the morality and virtue of the great Prophet," 
they are in the judgment of the Eeformer, Chris- 
tians, '' as defined, not by Dr. Johnson, nor any 
creed-maker, but by one taught from heaven." 

Just at this point the diflference between the 
views held by the Eeformers, and ^^ Kegulars," is 
clearly revealed We maintain that the belief of 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 307 

'^ one fact^^ is not all the faith, that is requisite to 
salvation ; but that saving faith embraces the whole 
system of facts, truths, and duties, essentially con- 
nected with this ^^ one fact/' If, then, any person 
professing to believe that Jesus^ the Nazarenej is the 
Messiah^ is ignorant of the import of the proposi- 
tion, or rejects any doctrine or fact, vitally connected 
with it, we consider it prima-facie evidence that he 
does not savingly believe the '' one fact/' He that 
denies the doctrine of human depravity and guilt — 
of the Divinity of Christ — of the vicarious and ex- 
piatory nature of his sufferings — or of a future state 
of rewards and punishments, furnishes decisive 
proof that he does not savingly believe the proposi- 
tion that Jesus is the Messiah ; or, at any rate, that 
he does not bring the ^^ doctrine of Christ,'' and 
should not be received into Christian fellowship. 
Such an errorist, whether baptized or unbaptized, 
our churches would promptly refuse to receive, and 
hold in fellowship. To do otherwise, would be to 
^' bid him God-speed," and to efface the distinction 
between truth and error. 

But the creed of the Keformation has but one 
article, viz. : I believe that Jesus, the Nazarene, is 
the Messiah. The belief of this proposition " is all 
that is requisite, as far as faith goes, to salvation." 
He that believes this ^^ one fact," and submits to 
" one institution expressive of it," and whose morals 
are correct, is, according to the doctrine of the 



308 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

Keformation^ "^ a Christian/' fit for ^^ admission into 
tlie churcli/' He is not required to believe any 
otlier fact or truth^ contained within the whole com- 
pass of revelation. He may^ along with the Eation- 
alists, deny the inspiration of the Scriptures ; he 
may^ in company with the Pelagians, deny the 
doctrine of man's innate depravity ; he may, in 
agreement with the various classes of Unitarians, 
pronounce ^^ Jesus, the Nazarene," a creature — a 
man — a mere man — a fallible man ; he may main- 
tain, as do the Universalists, there is no punishment 
of sin, except in this life ; he may, wdth the philo- 
sophic Priestley, insist that the soul of man is 
material, and perishes with his body ; he may 
believe that Joe Smith was a prophet, and that the 
Book of Mormon is a new revelation from God ; or 
he may be deplorably ignorant of the first principles 
of Christianity ; but according to the fundamental 
doctrine of the Keformation, he is entitled to a 
place in the church of Christ. Let there be no 
evasion among the Eeformers. This consequence is 
fairly and logically deduced from their boasted 
creed. And startling as it may seem to be, they 
may well be reconciled to it, as it establishes, what 
else it might be difficult to confirm, their claim to 
unusual liberality. A more liberal foundation for 
the union of all Christians, " as far as faith goes,'' 
without a total abandonment of evangelic truth, it 
would be difficult for human ingenuity to devise. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 309 

But this boasted foundation is as inconsistent with 
itself, as it is with the Scriptures. It contains the 
elements of its own destruction. He who believes 
" one fact/^ is to submit to ^^ one institution ex- 
pressive of it.^' Now^ is a man to be baptized with- 
out helieving that Christ has commanded believers 
to be baptized ? Why then is he to be baptized, 
and upon whose authority ? But if he is to be- 
lieve this^ then something more is requisite, '^ as 
far as faith goes/' even according to the Bethany 
platform, in order to the enjoyment of Christian 
Union. 

These remarks on the foundation of Christian 
Union, might have been introduced with equal pro- 
priety under the head of Gamphellism in its organi- 
zation ; but as I desired to discuss the doctrine in 
connexion with its practical results, I reserved the 
discussion for this place. 

I now propose to examine the actual working of 
this scheme of Christian Union. Experience is a 
great teacher. Time tries all things. Many a fine 
theory has vanished at the touch of experiment. 
"When Mr. Campbell's chief business was fault-find- 
ing, he had an easy, if not a grateful task. 'AH 
churches, sects and parties, and all the instructions 
and labors of uninspired men, had their imperfec- 
tions ; and no great ability or research was required 
to discover, publish, and caricature them. We 
have now an opportunity of learning from observa- 



310 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

• 

tion, in a measure, the fruits of the Reformation. 
Mr. Campbell cannot reasonably object that churches 
built upon the Apostolic foundation, of ^^ belief in 
one fact/^ and '^ submission to one institution/' 
modeled after the ^^ ancient order of things/' and 
commended to the world by such confident and lofty 
pretensions of superior light, purity, and freedom^ 
should be scrutinized with a careful and candid eye* 
What are the results of the Discipline adopted by 
the Eeformers ? 

It is discouraging to learn, as we do at the outset, 
" that the theory of the Eeformation is far in ad- 
vance of the practice.'' Mill. Har., vol. 4, p. 4. We 
have examined the theory, somewhat carefully, and 
have found it consistent neither with itself, nor 
the Scriptures ; and if '' the theory is far in advance 
of the practice^' the practice must be very unsatis- 
factory. It is due, however, to Mr. Campbell to 
observe, that his depreciation of the practice of the 
Eeformation in comparison with its theory, was 
based on his views of the theory, and not on mine. 

It has been shown that according to the funda- 
mental principle of church organization maintained 
by the Eeformers, no errorist, of correct morals, can 
be excluded from the church, provided he professes 
to believe that Jesus, the Nazarene, is the Messiah, 
and is immersed as an expression of this belief. I 
shall now proceed to show that the grossest errorists 
have been, knowingly and deliberately, received and 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 311 

retained in the cliurclies of the so-called Kefor- 
mation. 

Of the withering influence of Universalism I need 
say nothing. In the year 1828^ the Kev. Aylett 
Eains^ a Universalist preacher, was baptized^ in the 
Western Eeserve^ Ohio, for the remission of sins. 
In the same year he appeared at the Mahoning 
Association, with which Mr. Campbell was connected. 
Some of the brethren became alarmed at the intro^ 
duction of a preacher among them holding such per- 
nicious error. He publicly avowed that his pecu- 
liar views were unchanged ; in other words, that he 
was still a Universalist. At the suggestion of Mr. 
Campbell, it was agreed, '^ that if these peculiar 
opinions were held as private opinions, and not 
taught by this brother, he might be, and constitu- 
tionally ought to be retained.'' Mr. Kains declared 
that his views were, '' in his judgment, matters of 
opinion, and not matters of faith,'' and '^ that he 
would not teach them," and was by ^' a majority of 
the brethren" sanctioned as a proclaimer of the 
Eeformation. Mill. Har., vol. 1, 148. 

Unitarianism, in all its phases, from high Arian- 
ism to low Socinianism, is, in the judgment of the 
Christian world, a far more serious error than Uni- 
versalism. It divests the Gospel of its distinctive 
glory, and converts it into a lifeless, cold, and ineffi- 
cient code of ethics. The atonement of Christ, 
deriving its efficacy from the essential and infinite 



312 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

dignity of his person, is the only foundation of a 
sinner's hope and consolation. The Eeformers 
received Unitarians into their fellowship, and sanc- 
tioned their ministrations with a full knowledge of 
their errors. In the early part of the present cen- 
tury, a party of New Lights, headed by the Eev. 
Barton W. Stone, in the State of Kentucky, 
became Arians. In a letter to the Christian Bap- 
tist, published in the year 1827, he used this 
language : "If these observations be true, will it 
not follow undeniably, that the Word {di' liou) by 
whom all things were made, was not the only true 
God, but a person that existed with the only true 
God before creation began, not from eternity, else 
he must be the only true God ; but long before the 
reign of Augustus Caesar.'' p. 37. Mr. Stone's 
views of the atonement were in harmony with his 
conceptions of the person of Christ. He entirely 
rejected the vicarious and expiatory nature of Christ's 
sufferings ; and maintained that they contributed 
to the salvation of men only as illustrating the 
Divine goodness, they constituted a strong motive 
to repentance and piety. The efficacy of Christ's 
death was resolved by him entirely into the power 
of moral suasion. Mill. Har., New Series, vol. 5, 
pp. 63, 64. The peculiar views of Mr. Stone were 
cordially embraced by the sect of which he was the 
leader. This party, without any change in their 
religious tenets, coalesced with the Eeformers in 



CAMPBELLiSM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 313 

the West. Mr. Campbell and Mr. Stone, the prin- 
cipal leaders of the Keformation, had a discussion 
on the points on which they so widely diiFered, and 
in his concluding article the former used the follow- 
ing language — ^' The discussion, on my part, was 
undertaken with a reference to two points : The 
first, the transcendent importance of the question 
itself — For what did Christ die ? The second, a 
very general misconception, and consequent misre- 
presentation of our views of it. I did, I confess. 
expect that brother Stone v/ould have more fully 
and satisfactorily relieved himself and the cause of 
the Keformation from the imputation of some of 
our opponents on the subject of Unitarianism in its 
sectarian acceptation.'" p. 538. "" 

Of the extent to which the Arian notions of Mr. 
Stone did formerly, or do now, prevail among the 
Reformers, I have no means of ascertaining. In 
the year 1844, I made a tour in the West, of which 
notes were published on my return in the Keligious 
Herald. From the notes I extract substantially the 
following paragraph, the statements in which, so 
far as I have seen, have never been called in ques- 
tion, and which, I presume, cannot be successfully 
contradicted. 

'^ In the town of Columbia, Missouri, and its 
vicinity, the Disciples, better known as Campbcll- 
ites^ are somewhat numerous. They were formerly 
professedly Arians, but some years since they united 



314 CAMFBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

with the followers of Mr. Alexander Campbell. I 
took much pains to learn whether their views of tae 
divinity of Christ had -undergone a satisfactory 
change. All, with whom I conversed on the sub- 
ject, concurred in testifying that they reject the 
doctrine of Christ's divinity, and of his substitu- 
tional and piacular sufferings. One of the Profes- 
sors of the University of Mo., (situated at this 
place,) informed me that in a conversation which 
he held with Mr. A., a distinguished preacher of the 
denomination in this State, he most distinctly re- 
pudiated these vital principles of the evangelic 
system. One thing is certain- — the Disciples are 
not ignorant of the fact that they are generally be- 
lieved to be Arians ; and under this imputation 
they patiently lie. Unless there is a strange and 
prevalent misconception in the community, these 
Disciples stand in most urgent need of a thorough 
doctrinal reformation.'^ 

Mr. Campbell inquires, ^^ Have they (creeds) not 
been the fruitful cause or occasion,'' not of some, or 
of most, but '' of all the discords, schisms, and 
parties now existing in Christendom ?'' Chn. 
Sys., p. 108. I presume, he would now cheerfully 
retract this assertion— for, though in the interroga- 
tory form, it was intended to be an emphatic asser- 
tion. Certainly, some pretty well defined and 
serious errors have sprung up in the bosom of the 
Keformation, and have given rise to no little liscord 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 315 

and party spirit. John Thomas^ M. J),, an English- 
man, early, and with marked zeal, enlisted under 
the banner of the Reformation. He Avas the first 
Disciple who manifested any disposition to do his 
own thinking. All doctrines bearing the Bethany 
stamp were current among the Reformers, and were 
received, I will not say, without examination, but 
certainly with great readiness and cordiality. Dr. 
Thomas aspired to be, not a subordinate, but a co- 
ordinate Reformer. He admired, and extolled Mr* 
Campbell, approved of the Reformation, so far as 
it had been carried, but he was desirous to see it 
advanced to perfection, and he engaged with com- 
mendable ardor, in the effort to increase the light of 
the Reformation. New light he soon thought he 
discovered. He proposed to introduce new prin- 
ciples and practices into the Reformation. He 
maintained, with perfect consistency, that persons 
who had been baptized without proper views of the 
nature and design of baptism — ignorant of the new, 
or, as he deemed it, the old theory of baptismal re- 
mission — ^should be re-immersed, according to the 
true intent and spirit of the ordinance. Mr. 
Campbell agreed theoretically with the new Re- 
former on this point ; for in his debate with Rice, 
he said, '' Now if our baptism is for any other end 
or purpose than was that to which Paul submitted, 
it is another baptism, as much as bathing for health 
is different from a Jewish ablution for legal un- 



316 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS 1>ISCIPIINE. 

cleanness or impurity. The action has a meaning 
and a design ; and it must he received in that mean- 
ing ^ and for that design^ else it is another baptism'' 
p. 439. Mr. Campbell and many of his disciples 
were baptized without any knowledge of the true 
import and design of the ordinance ; but whether 
they did not perceive the logical consequence of 
their doctrine, or were unwilling to follow the 
guidance of the rising Eeformer, is not apparent — - 
but certainly they refused to receive baptism ac- 
cording to the meaning and design which they as- 
cribed to it. Many, however, embraced Dr. T.'s 
doctrine, and with new light and fresh joy, were 
re-immersed into the name of the Father, Son, and 
Holy Spirit. I have not access to any authorized 
standard, if such there is, of Dr. Thomas' religious 
faith and opinions. Kev. N. L* Eice, in his Debate 
with Mr. Campbell, spoke of him and his doctrines, 
as follows, p. 793. '^ Dr. Thomas, of Virginia, a 
prominent preacher in the gentleman's church, con- 
tended that men have no souls — that they are con- 
stituted of body, blood, and breath — ^that the word 
soul^ in the Scripture, means breath — and that in- 
fants, idiots, pagans, and Paadobaptists, are annihi- 
lated. My friend opposed his doctrines ; but the 
Doctor insisted that he had received his training 
in Ireland and Scotland, where the people believe 
in ghosts and witches, and that, although a great 
reformer, he was not quite reformed. Mr. Camp- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 317 

bell at lengtli refused to liold Christian l^Uowsliip 
with him^ and called on the church of which he was 
a member^ to excommunicate him/' 

The fulminations of Bethany vfere not heeded by 
the Doctor's church. They had been initiated into 
the mysteries of a higher and more glorious Eefor- 
mation ; and they would not consent to sacrifice 
their new and gifted guide to appease the wrath of 
their early, and once honored, but now forsaken 
teacher. Owing to the intractable spirit of the 
new Keformers, Mr. Campbell found it necessary to 
change the voice of denunciation into that of argu- 
ment, and finally of conciliation and compromise. 
The leaders met in Amelia County, Virginia, and 
after discussing the points at issue between them 
three days, without any change in the views of 
either, they, through the influence of common 
friends, became reconciled, and consented to co- 
operate in promoting the Eeformation. The terms 
of their reconciliation, taken from Dr. Thomas' 
paper, are recorded in the Mill. Har., New Series, 
vol. 3, pp. 74, 75. 

'^ We, the undersigned brethren, in free consul- 
tation, met at the house of brother John Tinsley 
Jeter, at Paineville ; and after frankly comparing 
our views, unanimously agreed upon the resolution 
subjoined, and submitted the same for the consider- 
ation of brethren Campbell and Thomas ; and bro- 
ther Thomas agreeing to abide the same, all diflficul-' 



318 CAMPBELLISM I>T ITS DISCIPI iNE. 

ties were adjusted^ and perfect harmony and co- 
operation mutually agreed upon between them. 

^^ Besolvedj That whereas certain things believed 
and propagated by Dr. Thomas, in relation to the 
mortality of man, the resurrection of the dead, and 
the final destiny of the wicked, having given offence 
to many brethren, and being likely to produce a 
division amon2:st us ; and believing the said views 
to be of no practical benefit, we recommend to 
brother Thomas to discontinue the discussion of the 
same, unless in his defense when misrepresented. 

" Signed by — Wm. A. Stone, Thomas E. Jeter, 
et als. The resolution being agreed upon by the 
brethren, brother Campbell and myself were re- 
quested to appear before them. The result of their 
deliberations was reported to us ; we acquiesced in 
the recommendation after a few words of mutual ex- 
planation ; and having recognized our Christian 
fraternity, the brethren gave in their names to 
brother Stone to be appended in the order afl&xed. 

Paineville, Amelia, Va., Nov. 15th, 1838." 

Dr. Thomas, whose monstrous errors had induced 
Mr. Campbell, in violation of his own principles of 
church organization, to denounce him as unworthy 
of Christian fellowship, was, as it appears from the 
above articles of agreement, not only retained in 
^' Christian fraternity,'' but sanctioned as a co-ope- 
rator in the Reformation ; on condition that he 
should abstain from the discussion of his peculiar 



OAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 319 

articles of belief, ^^ unless in Ms defense when mis- 
represented^' 

It certainly can surprise no man acquainted with 
the condition and tendencies of the world, to learn 
that a community, rejecting and ridiculing '' expe- 
rience before baptism/' and whose creed consisted 
in the simple and single article, ^^ I believe that 
Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ,*' should gather into 
its capacious bosom a heterogeneous multitude of 
persons of almost every variety of creed. The unity 
which distinguished the early Reformers after a few 
years began to be broken. The language of Ashdod 
began to be mingled with the pure speech of Canaan. 
One principle of the Eeformation is that every 
church member is an authorized preacher of the 
Gospel. ^^ He may^'' says Mr. Campbell, ^^ of right 
preachj haptize^ and dispense the supper ^ as ivell as 
pray for all men^ when circumstances demand it,'' 
Chn. Sys., p. 82. Under the stimulating influence 
of the Reformation ministers of the word were mul- 
tiplied rather too rapidly, in the judgment of the 
Reformer. Some had the ^Wanity, self-esteem, or 
boldness to assume an office, and a character, which 
neither the church on earth nor in heaven'^ awarded 
to them. In his efforts to correct this growing evil, 
Mr. Campbell made the following frank, and, no 
doubt, truthful acknowledgment. Mill. Har., voL 
6, No. 2, p. 64. 

^' The cause of Eeformation has suffered more 



320 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

frcm this portion of its pretended friends than from 
all its enemies put together. This state of things 
is indeed generally attendant on the incipiency of 
all public and social institutions'' (A very proper 
apology for the bitter fruits of the Ancient Gospel), 
'^ But toe have had a very large portion of this un- 
happy and mischievous influence to contend with. 
Every sort of doctrine has been proclaimed by almost 
all soi^ts of preachers^ under the broad banners and 
with the supp)0sed sanction of the begun Iteformatio7i. 
"We are glad to follow^ rather than to lead public 
opinion amongst ourselves on this subject. Expe- 
rience teaches with effect^ what theory could not 
accomplish/' 

'^ Every sort of doctrine has been proclaimed^ by 
almost all sorts of preachers'' — these are precisely 
the effects which I should^ a priori^ expect to flow 
from the fundamental principle of church organiza- 
tion adopted by the Reformers ; and to the existence 
of which Mr. Campbell has borne an incidental and 
reluctant, but most explicit testimony. Persons, 
holding gross and mischievous errors, have crept 
into the purest and best governed churches of Christ ; 
but they enter them in violation of the principles of 
their organization, and remain in them, so long as 
they do remain, in spite of their system of discipline. 
Into the Reformed churches they enter constitu- 
tionally, and from them they cannot be excluded 
without an abandonment of their basis of union. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 321 

As the point under discussion is of great import- 
ance, it is proper that we should attend to what 
Mr. Campbell has to say on it. I quote from his 
Christianity Bestoredj pp. 122, 123. 

'^ I will now show how they cannot make a sect of 
us. We will acknowledge all as Christians who 
acknowledge the Gospel facts, and obey Jesus Christ. 
But, says one, will you receive a Unitarian ? No ; 
nor a Trinitarian. We will have neither Unitarians 
nor Trinitarians. How can this be ! Systems 
make Unitarians and Trinitarians. Renounce the 
system, and you renounce its creatures. 

'' But the (sreatures of other systems now exist, 
and some of them will come in your way. How will 
you dispose of them ? I answer, We will unmake 
them. Again I am asked. How will you unmake 
them ? I answer. By laying no emphasis upon their 
opinions. 

'^ What is a Unitarian ? One who contends that 
Jesus Christ is not the Son of God. Such a one 
has denied the faith, and therefore we reject him. 
But, says a Trinitarian, many Unitarians acknow- 
ledge that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in a sense 
of their own. Admit it. Then I ask, How do you 
know they have a sense of their own ? Intuitively, 
or by their words ? Not intuitively, but by their 
w^ords. And what are these words ? Are they 
Bible words ? If they are, we cannot object to 
them — if they are not, we will not hear them ; or, 



322 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

what is the same things we will not discuss them at 
all. If he will ascribe to Jesus all Bible attributes, 
names, works, and worship, we will not fight with 
him about scholastic words : but if he will not 
ascribe to him every thing that the first Christians 
ascribed, and worship and adore him as the first 
Christians did, we will reject him, not because of 
his private opinions, but because he refuses to honor 
Jesus as the first converts did, and withholds from 
him the titles and honors which God and his apostles 
have bestowed upon him. 

'' In like manner we will deal with a Trinitarian. 
If he will ascribe to the Father, Son, and Holy 
Spirit, all that the first believers ascribed, and no- 
thing more, we will receive him — ^but we will not 
allow him to apply scholastic and barbarous epi- 
thets to the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit. 
If he will dogmatize and become a factionist, we re- 
ject him — not because of his opinions, but because 
of his attempting to make a faction, or to lord it 
over God's heritage. 

^^And will you receive a Universalist too.^ No; 
not as a Universalist. If a man, professing Uni- 
versalist opinions, should apply for admission, we 
will receive him, if he will consent to use and apply 
all the Bible phrases in their plain reference to the 
future state of men and angels. We will not 
hearken to those questions wdiich gender strife, nor 
discuss them at all. If a person say such is his 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 323 

private opinion, let him have it as his private opin- 
ion ; but lay no stress upon it : and if it be a wrong 
private opinion, it will die a natural death much 
sooner than if you attempt to kill it." 

As this quotation contains the gist of the Camp- 
bellite discipline, I must be permitted to subject it 
to a careful examination. 

Mr. Campbell teaches, in the above extract, that 
Unitarians and Universalists are to be received 
into the church, provided they will consent to hold 
their peculiar views as ^^ private opinions.'' How- 
ever erroneous and unscriptural may be their opin- 
ions, they have the full right to hold them in the 
church, if they will forbear to obtrude them on 
others. '^ We do not ask them,'' he says, ^^ to give 
up their opinions ; we ask them only not to impose 
them on others." Chn'ty Eestored, p. 121 

It may seem strange to some that the Bethany 
Eeformer, who is so zealous an advocate for the use 
of a ^^pure speech," and furnishes in the context of 
the extract under discussion, a long catalogue of 
w^ords and phrases, condemned simply on the ground 
that they are not found in the Scriptures, should 
have made such frequent and important use of the 
term opinions — a term never employed by the 
writers of the Nevv^ Testament. There is no valid 
objection to the use of this, or any other dignified 
term, in religious discussions, provided it is clearly 
defined, or v>^ell understood. What does he mean 



324 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIFLINE. 

by this word ? He has not made any attempt to 
explain it — to inform us where faith ends and opin- 
ion begins. 

Does he use the term opinion to denote specula- 
tions on subjects confessedly not included within the 
scope of revelation ? This can hardly be the sense 
in which he uses it ; for there is no person in 
Christendom who maintains that an agreement in 
such opinions is essential to church fellowship. 

Does he by the term opinion mean the vievv^s 
which men entertain concerning the import of the 
Scriptures ? I understand him to maintain that 
the persuasion of the Universalis t^ that the Bible 
teaches the final salvation of all men, and of the 
Unitarian^ that Christ is not a divine beings but 
merely an exalted man^ are opinionSy which they are 
at liberty to hold privately. 

This unscriptural and artificial distinction can be 
of no avail to the cause of the Keformer. Whatever 
he may call the peculiar views of the Unitarians 
and Universalists^ they are clearly and avowedly 
matters of faith. The Unitarian believes that the 
Scriptures do most unequivocally teach, that Jesus, 
the Christ, the Son of God, is not the true God, but 
a creature. If this persuasion is with the Unitarian, 
not an article of faith, but a mere opinion ; then it 
follows, that the persuasion of Mr. Campbell, that 
Christ is a divine being, is not a matter of faith, but 
a mere opinion. The Universalist believes that 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 325 

God has clearly revealed the final salvation of all 
men — he receives the doctrine on what he deems 
divine testimony — and if this persuasion is not faith, 
it may be reasonably questioned whether there is 
any faith on earth. Now, allowing that unity of 
opinion is not necessary in order to church fellow- 
ship, the admission cannot help Mr. Campbell out 
of his difficulty. For the differences between Trini- 
tarians and Unitarians are not mere differences of 
opinion — but are differences in faith — on funda- 
mental principles of faith, if there be any such. 

But call, if you please, the peculiar views of Uni- 
tarians, Universalists, &c., opinions^ and not faith. 
I utterly object to Mr. Campbeirs sweeping exclu- 
sion of all opinions from the basis of Christian 
Union. There are some opinions which entirely 
contravene the essential doctrine of the Bible. For 
example — ^it is a doctrine of the Bible, that 
Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God. The Uni- 
tarian admits this doctrine, but entertains the opin- 
ion that the phrase ^^ Son of God,'' imports, not his 
divinity, or essential Godhead, but his great eleva- 
tion among creatures. Now, here the opinion of 
the Unitarian, and the doctrine of the Bible are at 
issue. Let us now see the effect of the great solvent 
by which Mr. Campbell proposes to melt into one 
all the discordant elements of Christendom. The 
Unitarian and Mr. Campbell use precisely the same 
words — ^^ a pure speech/' '' Bible terms/' — ^but they 



326 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

attacli widely different meanings to them — sand know 
that they do ; and yet, because they use the same 
words, they profess to have unity of faith. They 
speak the same terms, with meanings as wide apart 
as the poles, and then boast of their harmony. 
What is this but sheer Jesuitism ? 

But Mr. Campbell imposes a wholesome restric- 
tion on his Unitarian or Universalist brother. ^^ If 
any person say such is his private opinion, let Mm 
have it as his private opinion.'' Whence did Mr. 
Campbell derive this rule ? Why did he not furnish 
the chapter and verse, where it is recorded ? It is 
an important law : I should be glad to know its 
author. As Mr. Campbell does not pretend to 
claim for it divine authority, I must enquire into 
its propriety. If these private opinions are innox- 
ious — do not unfit their holders for church fellow- 
ship — why may they not be propagated ? What 
evil can arise from the diffusion of such harmless 
opinions ? ^^ If he (the Trinitarian) will dogmatize 
and become a factionist, we reject him,'' — says Mr. 
Campbell. But suppose the Unitarian does not 
dogmatize, or become factious, but seeks, ^^ not as 
lording it over God's heritage,'' but by kind and 
persuasive arguments to convince men that Christ 
is not God, and that his death was not vicarious, 
will he be tolerated ? It would seem not, from the 
quotation under consideration. But this conclusion 
draws after it another consequence. Mr. Campbell, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 327 

of course^ claims no preeminence over his Unitarian 
brother. Then, as the Unitarian must not proclaim 
his peculiar opinions of the person and work of 
Christ, so neither must Mr. Campbell. But what 
then is the moral value of the stereotyped propo- 
sition, JesuSy the Nazarene, is the Messiah ? It 
means everything, and it means nothing ; and what 
it does mean no man may say ! 

But Mr. Campbell has prepared a way of escape 
from this logical sequence. He has been careful 
not to doom himself and his brethren^ Unitarians 
and Universalists, to absolute silence as to Scripture 
doctrine. They may use Scripture terms in a Scrip- 
tural sense. '^If he (the Unitarian) will ascribe to 
Jesus all Bible attributes, names, works, and wor- 
ship, we will not fight with him about scholastic 
words.'' ^' If a man professing Universalist opin- 
ions, should apply for admission, we will receive 
him, if he will consent to use and apply all the Bible 
phrases in their plain reference to the future state 
of men and angels.'' The law of Christian fellow- 
ship, prescribed by the Keformation, is that all shall 
use Bible terms, in the Bible sense, in speaking of 
Bible things. This is quite specious. I do not 
know who made this law, but I know who has 
broken it. Mr. Campbell has been a most flagrant 
transgressor of it. In his voluminous works, he has 
discussed almost every fact, doctrine, and duty of 
the Christian revelation, in a copious variety of un- 



328 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

scriptural^ and not imfrequently, most unwarrant- 
able terms. But who is to decide what is the 
'^ plain reference'' of '^ all the Bible phrases/' and 
when a man ascribes to Jesus '^ every thing that 
the first Christians ascribed ?'' Is the professor 
himself ? Then there is no restriction on church 
fellowship^ except what each person may choose to 
impose on himself. Is Mr. Campbell^ of Bethany ? 
Then he is a pope^ and ought to be infallible. Is 
the church to decide ? Then an agreement^ not 
merely in the belief of facts, or, properly of '^ one 
facty' but in opinions as to the meaning of the words 
and phrases in which the important facts and doc- 
trines of revelation are expressed, is by imjDlication 
clearly admitted as necessary to church union ; and 
consequently there must be in every such decision, 
an expression, clearly indicated, of this agreement. 
I am not yet done vdth this remarkable system 
of church discipline. The Trinitarian fares no bet- 
ter than the Unitarian or Universalist in the ^^ cur- 
rent Reformation.'^ '^ If he will ascribe," says Mr. 
Campbell, '' to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, 
all that the first believers ascribed, and nothing 
more, we will receive him — hut we will not alloiu 
Mm to apply scholastic^ and harharous epithets to 
the Father J the Son, and the Holy Spirit,'' I have 
searched the lively oracles in vain for this restric- 
tive law. It is not found in the creeds of the sects, 
the decrees of councils, nor the bulls of popes. It 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 329 

bears unmistakable marks of its Bethany origin. 
It hath ^^ the image and superscription" of Mr. 
Alexander Campbell. But let us scrutinize it. 
^^ Scholastic'' means pertaining to a scholar, or 
scholar like. A ^^ scholastic epithef is a term by 
\vhich a scholar would express the quality of a per- 
son or thing. ^' Barharoiis'' is synonymous with 
unlettered^ uncultivated. A ^^ barbarous epithet'^ 
is such a word as an illiterate man would employ to 
denote the quality of a person or thing. The pre- 
scriptive rule is exceedingly comprehensive and rig- 
orous. It permits neither learned nor unlearned 
terms to be applied to the Father, the Son, or the 
Holy Spirit. And the Eeformer speaks, if not with 
pontifical, certainly with no hesitating authority — 
'^ We mill not allow him to apply scholastic and bar- 
barous epithets,'' &c. Having considered the im- 
port and authority of the law, let us inquire into its 
reasonableness. A Unitarian who believes that 
Christ was a mere man, or an imperfect man, and 
that he died only as a witness of the truth, if he will 
consent to call his belief an opinion^ and keep it 
IDrivatCy or use only Scriptural terms, which he 
knows are understood by those who hear him in a 
sense entirely opposite to that in which he employs 
them, must be received into Christian fellowship. 
He is worthy of all confidence, and fraternal love, 
though^ according to Mr. Campbell's judgment, he 
errs on a fundamental point of the Christian system. 



330 CAMPBELLTSM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

But if a Trinitarian J with sound views of the Grospel, 
and a heart glowing with its spirit, in his learning, 
applies an erudite, or, in his simplicity, aj)plies an 
unrefined epithet '' to the Father, the Son, or the 
Holy Spirit,'' to illustrate his perfections, or exalt 
his glory, he must he rejected. And what is this 
but to exalt words above truth, and to sacrifice 
^^ unity in the faith, and in the knowledge of the 
Son of God,'' on the altar of a barren, heartless, sense- 
less agreement in words and phrases ? And what, 
permit me farther to inquire, must be the moral 
influence of that church which virtually abolishes 
the distinction between truth and error ? Nay, worse 
still, which gives to covert Unitarianism a marked 
preference over Trinitarianism, expressed, in epi- 
thets either ^^ harharoiis^'' or ''' scholastic V And 
who is to execute this new and inflexible law? 
Every Eeformed church. We will not allow the 
use of scholastic or barbarous epithets. No Trinita- 
rian^ who understands his duties or his rights, could 
consent to belong to a church claiming a power so 
unauthorized by revelation, and so abhorrent to 
reason. 

I have not yet descended to the bottom of this pit. 
Every man who knows the truth is bound to pub- 
lish it to others. This is a truth for the early and 
vigorous advocacy of which Mi\ Campbell deserves 
praise. I honor the man who honestly, boldly and 
earnestly propagates the views, call them faith or 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 331 

.^pinions^ which lie deems true and important. I 
prefer a candid^ out-spoken Unitarian, or Universal- 
ist^ to a concealed one. Now, what does the Camp- 
bellite discipline do, but oflfer a reward for hypoc- 
risy ? It says to the candidate for church member- 
ship, if you honestly hold, and frankly proclaim, 
what we deem error, we cannot receive you ; but if 
you will conceal your errors, we will embrace you 
with fraternal confidence and love. We have no 
objection to your errors — they are opinions — 
opinions are private property — ^'we do not ask'' 
you ^^to give up'' your " opinions" — ^but, whatever 
may be your sense of duty, you must hold your 
opinions ^' as private property," or if you express 
them at all, it must be in ^^ Bible phrases, in plain 
reference" to these matters of opinion. Now, let 
any discerning man say, whether the hypocritical 
and unscrupulous errorist is not treated with a con- 
sideration and affection which are withheld from the 
honest and conscientious errorist, or even the or- 
thodox Christian who expresses truth concerning 
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit^ in inter- 
dicted epithets. 

I must notice another point in this remarkable 
extract. '' If a person," observes the Eeformer, 
'^ say such (Universalism) is his private opinion, let 
him have it as his private opinion ; but lay no stress 
upon it : and if it be a wrong private opinion, it 
loill die a natural death much sooner than if you 



332 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

attempt to hill it.'' Whether Mr. Campbell intends 
this as a general or particular rule, I do not know. 
"Whether this specified error^ or all error^ will die 
soonest by being let alone^ Mr. Campbell does not 
inform us. Paul did not think the errors of the 
Judaizing teachers would perish sooner by neglect. 
Christ did not judge that the doctrine of the Nico- 
laitanes would die the sooner if there was no attempt 
to ojjpose it. The whole of Divine revelation is a 
vigorous combat with every system and species of 
error. What a pity it is that Mr. Campbell did not 
make an earlier discovery that error of opinion will 
die a natural death sooner than it can be killed. 
What a vast saving of ink^ and paper^ and toil^ and 
anxiety^ and exasperation^ and alienation^ it might 
have proved. But Mr. Campbell does not quite let 
error alone. He closes its mouthy or limits it to the 
use of Bible phrases^ and gives it a home and coun- 
tenance^ and respectability in the church — that '^ it 
may die a natural death.'' 

At this pointy so far as the present discussion is 
concerned^ the notable extract might be dropped. 
But for the purpose of showing the loose and inac- 
curate style in which Mr. Campbell treats the most 
important subjects^ another sentence must be no- 
ticed. '^ What is a Unitarian ?'' To this question, 
he replies, ^^One who contends that Jesus Christ is 
NOT the Son of God/' Now, it may be safely 
affirmed, that no Unitarian has ever denied that 



dAMPBELLiSM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 333 

Jesus Christ is the Son of God. The Unitarians 
not only believe that Jesus is the Son of God, but 
maintain that they receive him as the Son of God, 
according to the scriptural and rational import of 
the phrase. To charge ^hem, as Mr. Campbell has 
done, with denying that Jesus is the Son of God^ is 
to do them gross injustice^ — springing, it is pre- 
sumed, so far as he is concerned, not from malice 
aforethought but a culpable carelessness in the use 
of language. 

True, in the same extract, he represents the 
Trinitarian as admitting, that '' many Unitarians 
acknowledge that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in 
a sense of their own.'' But this can furnish no 
apology for the statement he makes that a Unita- 
rian is one who contends that Jesus Christ is not the 
Son of God," 

If verbal criticism were composed of flesh and 
blood, it might grow fat on the food furnished for 
its nourishment in the obscurities, inaccuracies and 
mistakes, abounding on the pages of the Keformer. 

We have seen that Universalists may be retained 
in the Eeformed churches on the not very intelli- 
gible condition, that they will ^^ consent to use 
and apply all the Bible phrases in their plain 
reference to the future state of men and angels f^ 
or, as it appears from the compromise with Dr. 
Thomas, ^^ to discontinue the discussion of the same, 
unless in their defense when misrepresented.'' But 



334 CAMPBELLISM JN ITS DISCIPLINE. 

suppose they should deem it incompatible with their 
duty and independence, to keep silent, or act merely 
on the defensive, regarding their peculiar doctrines 
or points of faith ? What then ? Does the 
Keformation make any provision for the correction 
of the evil ? A case calling for correction has 
recently presented itself. The ^^ current Reforma- 
tion'' has been quite fruitful of heresies. First, 
Dr. Thomas led off a sect of Materialists ; and 
lately Mr. J. B. Ferguson, pastor of the Reformed 
church in Kashville, having embraced Universalist 
views, is sustained by a majority of his church. The 
Millennial Harbinger, of January, copies from the 
Christian Age of December 22, as follows : p. 55. 

'' Mr, Clapp, of New Orleans, wrote to Mr. Gur- 
ley, of Cincinnati, alleging that Mr. Ferguson ^ was 
with them fully / that is, that he was a thorough 
Universalist, and that he would change the ^ Camp- 
bellite church in the South.' I do not aim to give 
the exact words — ^I give the es:act meaning." 
On this subject Mr. Campbell says : — 
^^ That Mr. Ferguson should seek to retain any 
position among us, is irreconcilable with any other 
view than that he intends to create a party in favor 
of Universalism. This is most unquestionably his 
design, if there be any truth in the documents,'' 
copied, in part, from the Christian Age, above, 
^^ Now, we award to every man what we claim for 
ourselves— liberty to preach and teach his own con* 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DiSCIPLINll. 335 

victions. But we must hold it incompatible with 
candor and honesty^ guilefully to hold a place 
amongst us^ when he is no more of us than Messrs. 
Gurley and Quinby, whom he endorses and com- 
mends as worthy of the most ample success^ in pro- 
pagating bald and deformed Universalism ; and how 
any church amongst us can choose him as its pastor, 
unless they, too, are ultra-Universalists, demands 
an explanation, which is alike due to itself and to 
the Christian brotherhood/^ 

Concerning the above statements and remarks^ 
several things deserve to be noted — * 

1. The ^^ current Eeformation'' seems likely to 
produce more than one schism for every generation^ 
the number ascribed by Mr. Campbell to every 
^^ sectarian creed/' 

2. It is proper to recommend to the Eeformers, 
a patient endurance of the evils for the removal of 
which their system has made no adequate provision. 
Mr. Ferguson occupies the foundation of Christian 
fellowship on which he was built. He believes one 
/ac^— has submitted to one institution — and his 
^^ deportment accords with the morality and virtue 
of the great Prophet j' and is, therefore, ^^ a Chris- 
tian, as defined, not by Dr. Johnson, nor any creed- 
maker, but by one taught from heaven.'' He has 
violated no covenant. Surely the Eeformers will 
not excommunicate and anathematize him ! Then 
he might write, '^ What a dangerous matter it has 



336 CAMPBELLISM IK ITS DISCIPLINl:. 

become, to think differently from'' Mr. Campbell 
and his friends ! '^ How perilous to view" the 
future state ^^differently from the ^ keepers of the 
faith' of Tennessee ! This alone exposes a person to 
the greatest anathema in the power of Ueformers, 
They can do no more in Tennessee^ as yet, than treat 
a dissentient as they would a murderer, or a vile 
adulterer !" It cannot be that the Disciples will 
knowingly subject themselves to such dreadful impu- 
tations. 

3. Should Mr. Campbell succeed in persuading 
or shaming Mr. Ferguson and his party into an 
abandonment of their position in the ranks of the 
Disciples, he will be far more successful than the 
Baptists were in their early struggles with Mr. 
Campbell and his party. It was more than sus- 
pected that they intended ^^ to create a party in 
favor of" the Beformation. The Baptists were 
willing to award to them what they claimed for 
themselves^ — ^liberty to preach and teach their 
own convictions — ^but they thought it incompatible 
^^ with candor and honesty," for men whose aim was 
to revolutionize the Baptist churches — who pro- 
nounced them a part of Babylon the Great — and 
whose labors were spreading discord and unhappi- 
ness among them — to hold a place in their churches. 
They would gladly have avoided the necessity of 
excluding the Reformers— of j)rovoking the cry of 
persecution — but they could not. The Eeformers 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 337 

did not deem it proper to retire from a position 
which gave them a favorable opportunity for propa- 
gating their sentiments^ and strengthening their 
party. The cup which they pressed to the lips of 
the Baptists, is now pressed to their own lips. It 
is bitter, but they must drink it. It may prove 
medicinal. If they retain the errorists, they cherish 
in their own bosom a faction whose aim is to ^^ change 
the Campbellite church in the South/' and if they 
exclude them, they sit in judgment on their reli- 
gious faith, follow the spirit and example of the 
creed-making sects, and utterly repudiate their 
boasted foundation of church union. They are in a 
dilemma. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 



When Mr. Campbell commenced his public career, 
serious apprehensions were entertained, by the most 
judicious observers, that it would terminate in wild 
speculations, fatal error, or, perhaps, downright in- 
fidelity. Several causes contributed to create and 
strengthen this apprehension. His rehgious views 
underwent early, various, and rapid changes. From 
ultra-Calvinism he quickly passed, through all the 
doctrinal stao;es, to low Arminianism — from beino; a 
P^edobaptist he became a Baptist, and soon left all 
his new brethren behind in his zeal for the ordinance 
of baptism. Other important changes were fre- 
quently occurring in his religious creed. No wonder 
that considerate Christians were prepared to see 
greater, and almost any, changes taking place in 
his views. It was supposed by many that he had a 
pretty strong leaning to Unitarianism. His rejec- 
tion of the terms Trinity^ and Trinitarian^ some 
incautious and obscure remarks which he penned 
on this profound subject, and the early coalition of 
his party with Mr. Stone, and his Arian followers, 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 339 

gave birth and vigor to the supposition. Others, 
again, suspected that the tendency of the Eeforma- 
tion was towards the renunciation of all spiritual 
religion, and the adoption of a heartless formalism. 
This fear originated from the irreverent and sarcas- 
tic manner iu which he treated religious experien- 
ces, and, indeed, the whole subject of earnest piety. 
These apprehensions of the evil tendencies of the 
Keformation were not confined to its opposers, but 
prevailed with many who viewed the labors of Mr. 
Campbell with more or less favor and interest. But 
Campbellism w^as not destined to realize, at any 
rate, in the first age of its existence^ and to the full 
extent, these fears. 

Several conservative influences conspired to check 
the evil tendencies of the system, if they really exist- 
ed. It was a reaeeming trait of the Reformation 
that it professed great reverence for the holy Scrip- 
tures. In common with other Protestant Chris- 
tians, the Eeformers maintained the supreme au- 
thority of revelation in matters of faith ; but they 
gave marked and unusual i^rominence to this point 
in their teaching. An unwillingness to tread the 
beaten track, and a desire to furnish original, strik- 
ing and systematic expositions of the Scriptures, 
made them very unsafe religious guides ; yet the 
custom of referring all questions concerning faith 
and practice to the arbitrament of the Scriptures 
proved to be the sheet anchor of their preservation 



340 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 

from the maslstrom of error into which they were 
drifting. They were mostly diligent and careful 
readers of the Bible ; but they read it^ with the 
glosses it received at Bethany. Their unavoidable 
association and intercourse with the Christian sects 
around them insensibly exerted over them a conser- 
vative influence. It was not easy, perhaps, not 
possible for them, to rise superior to the influences 
which by books, newspapers, sermons, and conver- 
sations, were constantly, though, for the most part, 
unintentionally, exerted to restrain their wander- 
ings, correct their errors, modify their views, and 
assimilate them to the surrounding Christian de- 
nominations. The glory of being a discoverer of 
cruth, and a reformer, may impel a man to endure, 
and even to glory in, reproach ; but others, who do 
not aspire after this glory, will gradually seek, at 
any rate, as far as the love of truth will permit, to 
soften the asperities of an unpopular system, and 
conform it to tie prevailing taste. He has been a 
careless observer of Campbellism who has not per- 
ceived its effort to get rid of the odium tlieologicum 
bj conforming its teachings, more and more, to the 
popular views. The reader may find a striking ex- 
emplification of this remark in Mr. Campbell's de- 
bate with Eev. N. L. Rice. It was perfectly obvioue 
throughout the discussion, that he was desirous of 
being accounted orthodox in his religious princi- 
ples, and nothing so much annoyed him as the quo- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 341 

tation of heterodox sentiments from his early writ- 
ings. 

Another cause, however, contributed more than 
both the above, to restrain the erring tendency of 
the Eeformation, and, in a measure, to turn it into 
the paths of sobriety and moderation. This cause 
was Thomasism, The reader has already seen that 
Jr. Thomas embraced the principles of the Eefor- 
mation, and proposed to follow them out to thei^ 
legitimate results. His views and labors rendered 
him very unj)opular, and brought upon the Refor- 
mation great reproach. Mr. Campbell, in opposing 
this new Eeformation, was compelled to employ, in 
part, the very weapons which the Baptists, and 
other evangelical Christians, had used in their con- 
tests with him. In combating the errors of Dr. 
Thomas, he naturally sought sympathy and coun- 
tenance ; and where could these be found except 
among the evangelical sects ? But if these were to 
be conciliated, they must be won, not by derision 
and contempt, but by candid and kind words, a re- 
turn to evangelical principles, and the exemplifica- 
tion of the true Christian sj)irit. From the rise of 
Thomasism may be dated the decline of the vaunt- 
ing, pugnacious spirit of the Eeformation. Internal 
discussions and conflicts made the Reformers less 
intent on foreign conquests ; and the bitter fruits 
of the Reformation, so early developed and matured, 
made them less confident of its excellence. Thus 



342 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 

the tendencies of the system were checked^ and its 
advocates were brought to reflection^ under circum- 
stances favorable to a correction of their early mis- 
takes. 

The means necessary for building are very differ- 
ent from those employed in tearing down. Mr. 
Campbell^ in the commencement of his Keforma- 
tion, was occupied in demolishing the ^^ kingdom of 
the clergy/' and all sectarian combinations. Every 
institution and every means^ therefore^ used in sup- 
porting and spreading the prevalent Christian or- 
ganizations^ was condemned as evil. But when he 
found himself at the head of a sect, he felt the 
necessity of resorting to the use of these condemn- 
ed measures for the purpose of consolidating and 
increasing it. On this subject it will be proper to 
enter into details. 

The reader has seen the utter contempt in which 
Mr. CamiDbell held the ^' hireling clergy.'' ^^ Every 
man, who receives money for preaching the Grospel, 
or for sermons, by the day, month, or year, is a hire- 
ling in the language of truth and soberness." Such 
was the doctrine of the early ^ but it is not the doc- 
trine of the current Reformation, Now, the Ke- 
formed churches have settled pastors, not reared up 
among them, but called from abroad to officiate in 
them, supported by regular salaries, and differing, 
in no material respect, from the ministers of other 
Christian denominations. They are ^^ clergy," or 



^^ hirelings/' according to the Bethany definition of 
these terms. 

The extravagance^ show^ and pomp of city con- 
gregations was a popular theme for declamation 
with the Eeformer of Brooke. Many simple mind- 
ed and pious Christians wished him success in his 
efforts to correct the evil. Unfortunately, the Ee- 
formed churches are, in this respect, following in tho 
wake of the sects. The writer was, not long since, 
in a large, beautiful and prosperous city, in the 
West, where the '^ Disciples' Meeting House'' 
rose, in grand proportions, and towering turrets, 
above all the temples of the ^^ Babylonians." Nor 
is this a solitary case. Every where the advocates 
of the '^ ancient Gospel," are vieing with the de- 
votees of a so-called spurious Christianity, in the 
cost and adornment of their houses of worship. 

Baptist Associations — the messengers of the 
churches met together for the purposes of fraternal 
consultation and advice — were pronounced by Mr. 
Campbell to be unauthorized of God. There was 
no '' Thus saith the Lord" for them. Chn. Bap., p. 
26. ^^ I hope," said an early Eeformer, who had 
fully imbibed the spirit of his master, ^' your paper 
will destroy associations^ State coTwentions^ — all of 
which are as assumed and as anti-scriptural as the 
infallibility and pontificate of the Pope of Eome." 
p. 144. But the Eeformed churches soon felt the 
need of mutual intercourse and concert in efforts. 



344 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 

And Mr. Campbell^ who could find no Scripture 
authority for Associations^ thus lays down the law of 
Christian cooperation. " Whether the churches in 
a given district shall^ by letter, messengers, or stated 
meetings, once or twice per annum, or oftener, com- 
municate with one another ; whether they shall 
send one, two, or twenty persons, or all go and com- 
municate face to face, or send a letter ; and whether 
they shall annually print, write, or publish their 
statistics, &c., &c., &c., are the mere circumstan- 
tials of the Christian institution. ''^ -'^ '•' Coopera- 
tion, as much as the intercommunion of Christians, 
is a part of the Christian institution.'' Chn. Sys., 
pp. 74-75. Associations^ it seems, are unscrip- 
tural, but Cooperation meetings are '^ a part of the 
Christian institution.'' It amounts to this brief 
proposition. What you do is wrong — if we do the 
same thing ^ and call it by a7iother name^ it is right. 
Bible Societies and Sunday -Schools — schemes of 
the clergy — were, in Mr. Campbell's early judgment, 
" fraught with mischief to the temporal and eternal 
interests of men." ^^ I have for some time," said he, 
'^ viewed both Bible Societies and Sunday- Schools, as 
a sort of recruiting establishments, to fill up the ranks 
of those sects which take the lead in them." Chn. 
Bap., p. 80. No sooner, however, were the Ee- 
formed churches organized, than they found it 
necessary to resort to these ^' recruiting establish- 
ments" for the purpose of filling up their ranks ; 



CAMPCELLIS:,! IN ITS TENDENCIES. 345 

and schemes of most pernicious tendency when 
cherished by the sects, became not only innoxious, 
but useful in the hands of their new advocates. 

Colleges were, in the early period of the Keforma- 
tion, placed among the marks of the beast. ^^ The 
Baptists, too/' he said, ^^ have got their scJiooIs, 
their colleges, and their Gamaliels too — and by the 
magic of these marks of the beast, they claim hom- 
age and respect, and disj)ute the high j)laces with 
those very Rabbis whose fathers were wont to grin 
at their fathers.'' Mill. Har., vol. 1, p. 15. In a 
few years after this passage was penned, we see its 
venerable author placed at the head, of Bethany 
College, in Virginia, with the high-sounding title 
of President. And did he, by the magic of this mark 
of the beast, claim homage and respect, and dispute 
the high places with the Rabbis, who descended from 
the grinning fathers ? Certainly not. He has no 
affinity with the beast. The seeming inconsistency 
is explained by this simple consideration. To over- 
throw the clergy and the sects, it was necessary to 
undermine the influence of colleges ; the most 
effectual way of destroying their influence was to 
produce the impression that they were marks of 
the beast — appendages of the Romish hierarchy — 
but to give respect and influence to the Reforma- 
tion, it was important to have a college, free, of 
course, from priestly rule, and who so worthy to 
preside over it, as the father of the Reformation, to 



346 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 

whom belonged the honor of the exhumation of the 
ancient Gospel ? 

To the education of the rising ministry^ the 
Reformation^ in its early stage, was most decidedly 
hostile. In reviewing a '^ Sermon on the duty of 
the church to prepare pious youth in her bosom, for 
the Gospel ministry/' in the year 1826, the editor 
of the Christian Baptist wrote as follows : p. 221. 

The '^ sermon is intended to proclaim that it is 
the duty of the church to prepare in her bosom pious 
youth for the Gospel ministry. Now, this is really 
a new message from the skies, for there is not one 
word, from Genesis to John, which says that it is 
the duty of the church to prepare pious youth for 
the Gospel ministry. This point could net be 
proved from the words of any previous ambassador, 
and it is unnecessary for any ambassador to prove 
his own communications to be true.'' 

At what precise time it is not known, but before 
the beginning of the year 1854, the ^^new message 
from the skies'' had been duly received and authen- 
ticated. The ^* Christian church^ needed an edu- 
cated ministry, and authority to raise up one was 
easily obtained. In the January No. of the Mill. 
Harbinger, of the present year, (1854) Mr. Camp- 
bell in a letter addressed to his wife, says : p. 40. 

'' Since I last wrote to you, I have been almost con- 
stantly on the wing, pleading the cause of man's re- 
demption in the department of an educated ministry. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 347 

That this is one of the Lord's ordinances^ cannot 
rationally be doubted by any student of nature and 
of the Bible. . . . Wo want not higher authority to 
teach or to constrain us to raise up — to educate and 
train men in human and Christian science^ that they 
may be able to teach others also. . . . We are 
pleased to see that every form of Protestantism, 
Quakerism alone excepted, is intent on the proper 
education of its itinerant ministry."' 

Now, this is refreshing. It sovmds so unlike the 
censorious, sterile, and hostile Campbellism with 
which our Noells, and Cloptons, and Semples, had 
to deal. It shows, conclusively, that reformatory, 
conservative influences have been modifying and 
improving the system. Every such indication of 
genuine reformation should be hailed with delight 
by the friends of evangelical piety. 

The reader has already been informed, through 
the extracts transferred from the writings of Mr. 
Campbell to these pages, of his views on the subject 
of Christian missions ; and will, doubtless, be sur- 
prised to learn that the Keformers, with Mr. Camp- 
bell at their head, have engaged in the missionary 
enterprise. Soon after their separate organization, 
they sent out, not missionaries ^ but evangelists 
— paid preachers — to proclaim the ^^ ancient Gos- 
pel.^^ For the appointment of missionaries^ not 
endowed with miraculous power, there could, at 
that time, be found in the Scriptures, neither pre- 



348 CAMPBELLIS:,! IN ITS TENDENCIES. 

cept^ example^ or inferential authority ; but thu 
appointment and support of evangelists to itinerate 
and proclaim the '^ancient Gospel/' was plainly- 
sanctioned by the ^^ Living Oracles/' But recently 
they have organized a Foreign Missiooi Board — and 
have sent forth^ not a churchy according to the ori- 
ginal Bethany plan for evangelizing the world, but 
individual missionaries, ^^ without the power of work- 
ing miracles/' of which, said Mr. Campbell, ^* the 
Bible gives us no idea." Chn. Bap., p. 15. 

The above facts will suffice to show the favorable 
changes which have taken j)lace among the Keform- 
ers. The Keformation has been gradually and 
greatly reformed. The present Millennial Harbin- 
ger is a far more respectable and dignified monthly 
than the old Christian Baptist. Though, it must 
be conceded, that its pages occasionally furnish 
proof that its veteran editor has not forgotten the 
art of vituperation. The Disciples generally are less 
opiniated, less eager for battle, and far more cour- 
teous and conciliatory, in their intercourse with 
other Christians, than they formerly vrere. In short, 
they seem to have taken the road back to Babylon, 
and have nearly completed their journey. 

There is manifestly a growing desire among the 
Reformers to be accounted '^ evangelical," '^ ortho- 
dox," and '^regular." A striking proof of this 
remark, was furnished, not long since, in the city 
of St. Louis, Mo. There was a Christian Associa- 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 349 

tion formed in that city. The members of the 
Association were required to be members of some 
^^ evangelical church.'^ Applicants for admission 
from the Christian^ or Keformed church, were re- 
jected on the ground that they furnished no evi- 
dence of being ^^ evangelical.'^ To obviate the 
difficulty, a prominent member of the church, with, 
as it is stated, the concurrence of the pastor, and 
other leading members, drew up and presented a 
statement of the doctrines held by the church. 
Here follows the creed : 

^^ The independent existence of one absolutely 
perfect Being, the Creator, Preserver, and Gov- 
ernor of all things : The divine inspiration, the 
authority, and sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures : 
The existence of three persons in the Godhead, the 
Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit : the incarna- 
tion and Atonement of the Son for human salva- 
tion : The justification of the sinner by faith, without 
the deeds of the law, or meritorious works of right- 
eousness, of any hind whatever, and the necessity 
of the Spirit's infiuence to regenerate the souls of 
men.'' Western Watchman, vol. 6, p. 126. 

Concerning the above article several remarks are 
worthy to be made. 

1. It is a creed. It is a brief summary of the 
doctrine in the belief of which the church is united. 
Though not formally sanctioned by the church, it 



350 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 

may be presumed to contain the truths deemed by 
them fundamental. 

2. It is a sound creed. Its orthodoxy, so far as 
it goes, will be readily admitted by all evangelical 
Christians. It contains, expressed in plain, and 
well understood, but not exclusively scriptural 
terms, the truths which are, by the Spirit of inspi- 
ration, placed as the principal parts of the Gospel 
system. It is the ^^far famed tree of evangelical 
orthodoxy,'' whose bitter fruits Mr. Campbell so 
eloquently described. It was drawn up and pre- 
sented for a worthy purpose — to furnish proof that 
those who were united in the belief and mainten- 
ance of its doctrines — were entitled to Christian 
confidence and affection. 

3. Its adoption is a virtual renunciation of Camp- 
hellism. This will appear from several considera- 
tions. It applies certain ^^ scholastic'' terms, as 
" three persons," and ^^ incarnation" to the Father, 
the Son, and the Holy Spirit, contrary to the ex- 
jDress and imperative law of the Keformation. '' We 
will not allow him, (the Trinitarian,) to apply 
scholastic epithets to the Father," &c. It sets at 
naught the foundation of Christian union laid by 
Mr. Campbell, and the Reformed builders generally 
— that the belief of one facty and submission to 
one institution expressive of it, ^' is all that is re- 
quired of Heaven to admission into the church'' 
And, lastly, it is a concession, in the face of all Mr. 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 351 

Campbeirs teaching, that a profession of belief in 
the Scriptures is insufficient to indicate a man's 
faith. 

4. It is a matter oi just and sincere cjratulation 
that these St. Louis Christians have given a clear 
and manly exhibition of their religious belief. They 
owed it to themselves, to the Christian Association, 
to the public, and, above all, to the truth, and to 
the God of truth, not to conceal their faith under 
loose and indefinite expressions, but to give it a 
free and honest utterance. If in doing so they have 
renounced the distinctive principles of the Bethany 
Keformation, they may have the consolation to re- 
flect that they have followed the oracles of God. 

6. If the Keformers generally are prepared to 
adopt this creed, with a few additions, to which, it 
is presumed, they have no serious objection, to com- 
plete the system, there seems to be no good reason 
why they should keep themselves, or be kept by 
others, in estrangement from their brethren of the 
evangelical sects. True, their Reformation would 
utterly vanish, except in dim and shadowy remem- 
brance. But what of that ? It was commenced, 
and prosecuted, most unsuccessfully, to promote 
Christian union — let it perish, with a fairer pros- 
pect of securing the same glorious result. 

We have seen the vaunting pretensions of Camp- 
bellism to be the ^^ ancient Gospel.'' All the world- 
liness, contentions, schisms and apostasies among 



352 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 

the sects were ascribed by its advocates to creeds, 
evangelical orthodoxy^ metaphysical speculationSj 
&c. It was confidently predicted that the fruits of 
the ancient Gospel would be as far superior to the 
fruits of the popular exhibitions of Christianity, as 
the grapes of Eshcol were to the aj)ples of Sodom. 
The experiment has been made on a somewhat ex- 
tended scale. What is the result ? 

The most enthusiastic admirer of the system 
must admit that its fair promises have not been ful- 
filled. The Keformation has proved a fiiilure. Its 
converts have been considerably increased ; but ac- 
cording to Mr. Campbell's concession, they are a 
heterogenious multitude, among whom ^' every sort 
of doctrine has been proclaimed^ hy almost all sorts 
of preachers'' It will hardly be maintained that 
the rapid increase of the Keformers is a proof of 
the truth of their system. Campbellism has been 
far outstripped in its conquests by Mormonism. If 
success in winning converts is the test of truth, the 
Bethany Eeformer must confess the inspiration of 
the prophet of Nauvoo. But what has been the 
moral influence of Campbellism ? Hare the con- 
verts made by the ^^ ancient Gospel'* been preem- 
inent for modesty, humility, disinterestedness, so- 
briety of deportment, good works, stabihty, and 
usefulness ? Comparisons are invidious. They 
would not now be made, if they were not necessary 
to expose the fallacy of the liberal professions of the 



CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 358 

early Eeformatlon. It may he confidently affirmed^ 
that experience has falsified them. The fruits of 
Campbellism are not better than were the fruits of 
the Gospel preached by Noell and Semple, and their 
worthy compeers. 

If the Keformation has accomplished any good, 
it is attributable^ not to its peculiarities, but the 
great principles which it has inculcated, sometimes 
with strange inconsistency, in common with " evan- 
gelical orthodoxy.'' Just in proportion as it be- 
comes assimilated to evangelical Christianity, and 
renounces, or ignores, its distinctive principles, we 
may hope for an increase of its usefulness. 



CONCLUSION. 

The rise, progress and variations — the principles, 
discipline and tendencies of Campbellism have been, 
somewhat carefully, examined. Many important 
points have been passed without notice. To at- 
tempt the correction of all the errors into which Mr. 
Campbell has fallen, would involve the necessity of 
a minute review of all the ponderous volumes which 
he has written. Scarcely a page of his writings is 
free from false logic, false philosophy, or false theol- 
ogy, to say nothing of philological, grammatical and 
rhetorical blemishes. But the writer has deemed 
it proper, so far as he has discussed the evils of 
Campbellism, to confine his remarks to its graver 
errors. It is suitable, in conclusion, to offer a few 
general remarks on the whole system. 

The examination of the subject must tend greatly 
to streng:then the conviction that the svstem of 
truth, generally designated among Protestant Chris- 
tians, the '' evangelical^' oi^ '^ orthodox faith^" is 
Scriptural. When Mr. Campbell was attacking it, 
with so much learning, ingenuity^ and diligence. 



CONCLUSION. 355 

many feared that it would be overthrown. The fear 
was idle. To suppose that the essential principles 
of the Gospel had been for ages concealed^ until 
they were brought to light, '^ in the year of grace^ 
one thousand eight hundred and twenty-three/^ 
was a grand absurdity. Under a spiritual despot- 
ism, where wealth, learning, ambition, and interest 
are enlisted to maintain the existing hierarchy, and 
to repress and crush the spirit of inquiry and inno- 
vation, ignorance and error may be perpetuated. 
This remark explains the uniformity of error pre- 
vailing under the unbroken reign of '' the man of 
sin." But where men enjoy freedom to read and 
study, to teach and practice, the Word of God, with 
ample means to investigate its import, it seems in- 
credible that its fundamental principles should re- 
main unknown. That the Protestant Eeformation, 
in a good degree, freed the human mind from spirit- 
ual bondage, and stimulated it to vigorous and per- 
severing efforts after truth, will scarcely be denied. 
Though some Protestant governments have imposed 
needless and injurious restrictions on religious in- 
quiry, others have tolerated, protected and encour- 
aged it. Many men, eminent for their piety, genius, 
learning, candor, and industry — men as good, and 
as great as the world has seen, or is likely to see — 
availing themselves of this liberty, have devoted 
their lives, under circumstances favorable to success, 
to the study of the Bible, and have been willing to 



356 CONCLUSION. 

peril and sacrifice all worldly advantages in the 
maintenance of its truths. That not one of them 
should have discovered the essential principles of 
the Gospel^ until it was disinterred by Mr. Camp- 
bell of Bethany^ is preposterous. Whence arose 
the difficulty of understanding the system ? From 
its obscurity.^ This will scarcely be pretended. 
From want of candor, learning and industry in the 
inquirers.^ This, surely, will not be affirmed by 
one who has been so deeply indebted as Mr. Camp- 
bell, to his predecessors for his parade of learning 
and criticisms. It is pleasing to the pious mind to 
reflect, how the good and great, in every age and 
land, who have made the Scriptures their study and 
guide, have harmonized in their views of the essen- 
tial facts, doctrines, and duties of Christianity. 
Divided they have been concerning ordinances^ 
church polity, and various speculations, but united 
in all that pertains to the vital principles — the soul- 
saving truths — of the system. That any man should 
imagine, after so many gifted minds had carefully, 
laboriously, and with much prayer, studied the 
Bible, that he should be the jirst^ in many genera- 
tions, to discern its hidden import, and open it, in 
all its beauty, fulness and glory, to the admiring 
gaze of mankind, savors more of vanity than of a 
sound judgment — resembles more the hallucination 
of a distempered mind, than the dictate of sound 
Christian philosophy. The system of faith, held by 



CONCLUSION. 357 

evangelical Christians^ is impregnable. It has with- 
stood, and it. is destined to withstand, the assaults 
of the most powerful, and the machinations of the 
most subtle, minds. All hope of any new and im- 
portant discoveries in the system is visionary. Chris- 
tianity does not belong to the progressive sciences. 
Its primary facts, principles, and duties were plainly 
revealed, and fully confirmed in the beginning ; and 
could be understood just as easily and clearly before 
the first number of the Christian Baptist appeared, 
as they can be now. It would be difficult for the 
most devoted admirer of Mr. Campbell to point to 
a single essential principle or duty of the Christian 
system, which he has disinterred, or on which he has 
shed any fresh light. If all his criticisms, argu- 
ments, illustrations, and declamations were struck 
from existence, there would not be one particle less 
of religious light in the world. The Bible would 
shine with undiminished lustre. The host of evan- 
gelical authors, who shone in the religious firma- 
ment, before the dawn of the Bethany Reformation, 
have retained their places, and their brilliance. 
After having pronounced the fruits of the '^ far 
famed tree of evangelical orthodoxy'' to be spurious 
and pernicious, and having labored, with all his 
powers, and with untiring diligence, for almost 
thirty years, to uproot and destroy it, Mr. Campbell 
is, at length, constrained to come forward and claim 
the honor of being orthodox. He has become, it 



358 CONCLUSION, 

seems, a ^^ regular/' The history of this Eeforma- 
tion furnishes a most illustrious proof of the truth, 
stability and excellence of *^ evangelical orthodoxy/' 
It has undergone a fiery ordeal. Learning, inge- 
nuity, wit and zeal, with all the weapons that proud 
rationalism, and scoflSng infidelity, could furnish, 
have been employed for its overthrow, and employed 
with a signal want of success. Every distinctive 
principle of the popular evangelical system, as main- 
tained by the Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist and 
other orthodox Christian denominations, has been 
unscathed. The doctrines of hereditary human de- 
pravity — (denied by some of the Keformers) — of the 
necessity of the influence of the Spirit to renovate 
the soul of man — and of justification by faith, with- 
out any necessary connexion with the act of baptism 
— (which have been denied, or understood to be de- 
nied, by all the Eeformers) — have firmly main- 
tained their ground. Like some tall and hoary clift", 
against which the mighty waves of the ocean have 
dashed, and foamed, and raged for a time, and to 
whose strength they have at last rendered homage, 
by subsiding into a comparative calm at its base, 
the evangelical faith, ^' the popular exhibition of 
Christianity,'' has received and resisted the threat- 
ening surges of the '^ current Eeformation," until 
their force is spent, and their receding fury pro- 
claims its stability. Commencing its assaults on all 
Christian denominations with dauntless intrepidity, 



CONCLUSION. 359 

and giving strong assurances of their early overthrow, 
and the speedy dawn of the Millennium, the Eefor- 
mation has been frittered away to nothing, or has 
ended in a huge mass of inconsistencies and contra- 
dictions. 

The course which the Baptists should pursue re- 
lative to the Keformers, is worthy of the gravest 
and most candid consideration. The propriety of 
their action in separating the Campbellites from 
their communion has been already discussed. Much 
as the necessity of the measure was deplored, by the 
conservative portion of the Baptist churches, time 
has clearly demonstrated its wisdom. There is now 
far greater harmony of views, and far less alienation 
of feeling, between the Baptists and Eeformers, than 
there was previously to their separation. But still 
the question comes up, with augmented interest 
and importance, How shall we act towards the Ee- 
formers ? 

The union of all Christians, so far as it can be 
secured without sacrificing the claims of an enlight- 
ened conscience, or giving countenance to pernicious 
error, is greatly to be desired. It is the duty of 
every believer in Christ, not only to pray for this 
consummation, but by the cultivation of a candid, 
kind and forbearing spirit, to endeavor to promote 
it. The Eeformers belong to the Baptist family, 
though, in our view, they are an erring branch of it. 
They agree with us on the action and subjects of 



360 CONCLUSION. 

Christian baptism^ however widely they may differ 
from us on other points ; and it is to be regretted 
that those who substantially concur in regard to 
church organization and ordinances should be divided 
in their affections and efforts. The principles which 
we hold in common have sufficient opposition to en- 
counter from without^ to make it exceedingly im- 
portant not to weaken their influence^ and retard 
their progress by discord and strife among ourselves. 
Union^ however^ valuable as it is^ may be j^urchased 
at too high a price. A professional union^ founded 
on a common use of words and phrases, to which 
we attach no meaning, or widely different meanings, 
or on a mutual agreement to conceal the truth, is 
neither Scriptural, reasonable, nor desirable. Fel- 
lowship in the Gospel — the only intelligent, hearty 
and efficient union of Christians — implies an agree- 
ment in the essential facts, principles and duties of 
the system. And this fellowship cannot be secured 
by unscrupulous compromises, and Jesuitical pro- 
fessions, but only by unity of views concerning 
Christian doctrine. 

How far error may be tolerated by a church of 
Christ for the sake of union, it is not easy to decide. 
The Bible furnishes no direct and explicit answer 
to the question. Error may be so palpable and 
gross, call it faith or opinion, as to preclude the 
possibility of its toleration by a church, without a 
dereliction of duty, and a virtual abandonment of 



CONCLUSION. 361 

the cause of truth. Whether the Eeformers hold 
rehgious views incompatible with their reception 
into evangelical Baptist churches^ is the practical 
question. So far as the Disciples are affiliated 
wdth the Stonites^ or Arians of the West^ their re- 
ception into the fellowship of our churches would 
be, on our part, base unfaithfulness to the cause of 
Christ, and of truth. Nor would the evil be, in 
any degree, mitigated by their hypocritical consent 
to conceal their errors, or express them in Scriptural 
phrases, to which they have attached, and are un- 
derstood to attach a false meaning. Without con- 
demning and renouncing their error, they can have 
no Scriptural fellowship with those who understand 
and love the Gospel. How far this heterodoxy now 
prevails among the Eeformers, the writer does not 
possess the means of deciding. 

It would not be difficult from the writings of Mr. 
Campbell to draw up a creed, which in all essential 
points would be acceptable to evangelical Christen- 
dom. In this chiefly lies the danger of Campbellism. 
Thousands of persons have been seduced into the 
belief that the Eeformers differ nothing from the 
Baptists, except in weekly communion, and other 
unimportant points. 

But the reader has seen that Campbellism has 
two sides — an orthodox and a heterodox — an evan- 
gelical, and, for lack of a better term, it must be 
said, a Eeformed side. It would be quite easy to 



362 CONCLUSION. 

select from Mr. Campbeirs books^ without any per- 
version of the quotations, a system of doctrine so 
utterly at variance with the Scriptures, and so 
repugnant to the feelings of pious people, that it 
would receive the undivided condemnation of every 
evangelical denomination. 

Now, if the Eeformers would secure the confi- 
dence and affection of orthodox Christians, it will 
not be sufficient that they should proclaim their 
own orthodoxy — as Mr. Campbell has recently pro- 
claimed his — nor even to put forth, in some intelli- 
gible form, the orthodox articles of their belief ; but 
they must explicitly repudiate the doctrines which 
they have been supposed to hold, at variance with 
the evangelical syetem. They may have been mis-^ 
understood, or misrepresented, or partly misunder- 
stood, and partly misrepresented ; but the effect in 
preventing Christian union is precisely the same, as 
if they had been rightly understood, and rightly 
represented. But while it may be conceded, that 
their views and intentions may have been miscon- 
ceived, it must be maintained that their language 
has been candidly and fairly interpreted. But if 
they have been misunderstood or misrepresented, 
from no matter what motives, they owe it to them- 
selves, their Christian brethren, and their Eedeemer, 
to place themselves rectus in curia ; and this cannot 
be done, either to the confusion of their foes, or the 
satisfaction of intelligent, inquiring Christians, but 



CONCLUSION. 363 

by a distinct and formal repudiation of the hetero- 
dox sentiments which they are charged with having 
published. 

It is proper to descend to particulars. If the 
Keformers would secure for themselves the confi- 
dence and affection of the great evangelical family 
of Christians^ let them explicitly disavow — 

First, That all the converting power of the Spirit 
is in the Word — in the sense in which ninety-nine 
persons out of every one hundred understand the 
language^ and^ indeed^ in the only sense of which it 
is fairly susceptible. 

Secondly, That regeneration^ the new birth^ and 
conversion^are identical with baptism,in the language 
of Scripture^ or common sense^ or any other except 
that of superstition. And let them unequivocally 
maintain — 

Thirdly. That prayer is the plain and imperative 
duty of believers, whether baptized or not. 

Fourthly. That repentance, faith, and baptism, 
are not equally essential to the remission of sins ; 
but that this blessing is virtually, really obtained 
by faith in Christ, aiid only formally and declara- 
tively in baptism. And, 

Fifthly. That the belief of one fact, and perform- 
ance of one act, with a moral life, is not a sufficient 
foundation for Christian union ; but that this union, 
to be Scriptural and valuable, must be based on the 



364 CONCLUSION. 

belief of the fundamental facts and doctrines of the 
Gospel. 

It may be necessary for the Eeformers to disavow 
other sentiments which they have maintained, 
or which^ from their associations, they have been 
suspected of holding ; but the above principles hav- 
ing been clearly and repeatedly proclaimed, and 
made the very ground-work of the Eeformation, 
must be repudiated, before they can reasonably hope 
to be admitted into the evangelical family. 

This renunciation of the errors of Campbellism, 
in order to secure the proposed end, must be made, 
not in a fugitive essay, nor in equivocal terms, nor 
on individual responsibility, but in some explicit, 
formal, solemn, and authorized manner — like the 
^^declaration of belief presented by the Brush Eun 
church to the Eedstone Association, or the summary 
of doctrine drawn up by the Glwistian churchy in 
St. Louis, to convince the Christian Association of 
the validity of their claim to be considered '' evan- 
gelical.'' 

For his indiscriminate, violent, and bitter attack 
on their cherished principles, on their institutions 
for diffusing the light of the Grospel, and on their 
well-meant efforts to meliorate the condition of 
men, and display the glory of Christ, Mr. Campbell 
owes an apology to the Christian world. Especially 
is this due, as he found it expedient, in building up 
the ^^ Christian church,'' that is, his own party, to 



CONCLUSION. 365 

employ the same institutions, and the same means, 
for the use of which he so freely censured them. 
Though this apology may not be essential to the 
restoration of harmony between the Baptists and 
Keformers, it is indispensable to the restoration of 
Christian confidence in the leader of the Eeformation. 

Some concessions, too, may be due on the part of 
the Baptists, to secure the desired union. They 
have occasionally evinced, in their contests with 
the Eeformers, an acrimony, seeming to spring from 
personal dislike, rather than zeal for the truth and 
honor of God, which they should readily admit, and, 
in future, carefully avoid. 

The regular meeting of all the churches, in their 
respective places of worship, on every Lord's-day, 
which the Baptists have never opposed, they should 
more earnestly insist on, and more faithfully practice. 
Weekly communion they should not contend about, 
but let it be introduced into the churches wherever, 
and whenever it is deemed obligatory or expedient. 
They should not yield to the Eeformers, as in truth 
they do not, in their reverence for, their submission 
to, and their diligent study of, the holy Scriptures. 

As to the name by which they shall be called, 
neither the Baptists nor the Eeformers should be 
much concerned. The Disciples of Christ were not 
called Christians until eleven years after his ascen- 
sion ; and then, whether the name was given by the 
Spirit of inspiration, assumed by them in honor of 



366 CONCLUSION. 

their Master, as a matter of expediency, or adopted 
by their enemies as a term of reproach, the sacred 
historian has not informed ns, and we can only con- 
jecture. We should be solicitous about truth and 
piety, not names. The name Baptist^ it is presumed, 
was not assumed by those who bear it, after deliber- 
ation, and of choice, nor would it be practicable for 
them, at their option, to lay it aside. The appel- 
lation Christian^ can never, in the present divided 
state of the religious world, be employed to desig- 
nate, without a qualifying epithet, any particular 
party of Christians. But if we see eye to eye, speak 
the same things, and are animated by the same 
spirit, whether we are called Baptists, Keformers, 
or Christians, or are distinguished by some other 
name, is of little consequence. The primitive 
Christians were equally pious, happy, and useful, 
whether they were called Gralileans, Disciples, or 
Christians. Our fathers ecclesiastic, were not less 
worthy when they were known as ^^ Ana-baptists,'' 
than their descendants to whom has been accorded 
the name of Baptists. 

Is there any prospect of the consummation of 
such a union as has been briefly sketched ? None, 
it is to be feared, during the life-time of Mr. Camp- 
bell. The frequent changes of his religious views, 
have induced a general lack of confidence in his 
stability. His manifold inconsistencies, and contra- 
dictions, have awakened, in many minds, a suspicion 



CONCLUSION. 367 

as to the integrity of his purposes. In the course of 
the thirty years' conflict between the Eeformers and 
Baptists^ many distinguished combatants^ whether 
justly or unjustly, is not material, have deemed 
themselves unfairly, unkindly, or rudely treated by 
Mr. Campbell ; while he, doubtless, has against 
them a hst of grievances, equally long and grave, to 
be redressed. Beside all these things, having for 
more than a quarter of a century, been the man 
of his party, it is not reasonable to expect that 
he would consent to unite himself v/ith a deno- 
mination in which, though he might occupy a pro- 
minent place, he could not occupy the position of 
leader. In addition to these obstacles, it will require 
no small measure of humility and moral heroism in 
him, to acknowledge that his Eeformation has proved 
a failure, and that his views are in substantial agree- 
ment with those of the sects against whom he has 
so long and fiercely warred. AH these matters 
considered, there is very little ground to hope that, 
in the life-time of the Reformer, and with his 
approbation, such a union between the Eeformers 
and Baptists will be effected, as truth, piety, and 
Christian cooperation demand. 

Still there is ground to hope for the ultimate 
scriptural and cordial union of these parties. The 
work of assimilation between them is going on, and 
it will go on, with increasing rapidity, as the original 



368 CONCLUSION. 

causes of irritation are left behind and forgotten^ 
and the veterans in the strife^ gradually quit the 
hattle-field. In many places Campbellism has lost 
its pugnacity, and is fast losing its distinctive 
elements, and receiving a new impression from the 
religious principles with which it is ceaselessly 
coming in contact. The Baptists, too, it must be 
admitted, are not precisely what they would have 
been, had there been no Kefoi^mation. They have 
not been uninterested spectators of the religious 
convulsions and changes around them. While they 
have seen no cause to abandon any of their distinc- 
tive principles, or practices, they have corrected 
many of their mistakes, burnished their armor, and 
learning wisdom alike from the successes and fail- 
ures of their opponents, have prepared themselves 
for concerted, vigorous and determined efforts in 
support of what they deem the cause of truth, and 
of Christ. Let the process of assimilation go on. 
Good men should earnestly pray for its progress. 
All should aim to promote it by an honest, earnest 
adherence to the teaching of the Scriptures, by 
diffusing the light of truth, and, above all, by cul- 
tivating the spirit of the Eedeemer — the spirit of 
love, gentleness, meekness, and candor. 

But until this union can be scripturally, and with 
the concurrence of the churches, consummated, it 
becomes the Baptists to pursue a firm, straight- 



CONCLUSION. 369 

forward^ but conciliating course, receiving no Ee- 
former into their fellowship without a distinct re- 
nunciation on his part of the peculiar principles of 
Oampbellism, and a clear assent to the fundamen- 
tal doctrines of the evangelical system, for whicL 
wo have so long and faithfully contended. 



347 7 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper proces! 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: April 2006 

PreservationTechnologiej 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATIO 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

llllliilllllill 




017 645 337 



il; 



u^r 



:hI^^ 








